Agenda item

To consider the attached report.

Contact Officer:  Nick Graham

The Committee received a report on the proposed updates to the Council’s constitution to allow for better and more transparent decision making. Under s9P Local Government Act 2000 the Council was required to prepare and keep up to date a Constitution containing the standing orders of the Council and such other information as was required or was desirable. Buckinghamshire Council’s Constitution was effective as from 1 April 2020 and was regularly reviewed to ensure the Council’s operation was properly supported and governed by the Constitution. The last review took place in April 2021.

Oversight of the Constitution was shared between the Audit and Governance Committee and the Standards and General Purposes Committee. The power to change the Constitution was reserved to full Council via recommendation from the Standards and General Purposes Committee. The Monitoring Officer also had delegated authority to make amendments to ensure the Council conducted itself lawfully, and minor amendments where appropriate.

A Constitution Members Working Group consisting of the Chairmen and Vice- Chairmen of both the Audit and Governance Committee and the Standards and General Purposes Committee had met a number of times to consider proposed changes and provided initial comments to help inform the review of the Constitution as required by full Council.

During discussion the following points were noted:-

·         A Member expressed concern about the high level text used in Appendix 1 of the report. The Service Director Legal and Democratic Services reported that the changes were set out in principle to allow drafting of the proposed changes to take account of member feedback, further legal input or ensure other affected parts of the Constitution could be amended accordingly. It was therefore recommended that the Monitoring Officer determined the final wording of the in-principle proposals and any associated/incidental amendments with the approval of the Constitution Working Group, and to then change the Constitution accordingly together with any other necessary incidental amendments.

·         The Member then further expressed concern about the change to Community Boards which was to provide a comprehensive Terms of Reference for Community Boards to include provision for membership in the Constitution.  The Service Director Legal and Democratic Services reported that the framework document for Community Boards had been formulated and the terms of reference would be drafted in accordance with that practice and enshrined in the Constitution therefore there would be no change to the current working of Community Boards. The Constitution was constantly under review and any changes could be made in the forthcoming year if there were any concerns about the drafting. Another Member commented that Community Boards did operate on a different basis across Buckinghamshire and it would be good to find the optimal model. Concern was expressed about the transparency of the budgetary process which could be undertaken via email but then still had to go through a process with the Cabinet Member for Communities with no recall back to the Board. The review of the terms of reference was a big piece of work as the Community Boards were the main mechanism linking into communities. A scrutiny review had also been undertaken on Community Boards where the terms of reference had been discussed and this information could be used as part of this review. A proposal was then put that the terms of reference of Community Boards should be reviewed by the Working Group.

·         Reference was made to the Planning changes particularly extending the right of Call in to ‘Permission in Principle’ planning applications  which were currently only dealt with by officers. Those did not extend to how a Chairman of a Planning Committee could prevent an item going to Committee because of their role when Members wanted it to go to Committee. The Member had specifically asked for that change. Another Member expressed concern about call-in and that this was a decision for the Chairman in consultation with the lead officer if one Member called-in the decision. If three Members called it in then it would be automatically considered by the Committee. The length of time objectors had to speak at the Planning Committees should also be reviewed, particularly with large developments as currently the speaking time was not adequate. The Service Director Legal and Democratic Services reported that the Planning Committee was quasi-judicial and all parties had to have the same amount of time. If this should be increased this would need to be discussed by the Planning Committee Chairman in the first instance. The call in facility was essentially a request by Members for the Committee to make a decision on a planning application rather than an officer making the decision under their delegated authority. The Member was obliged to consult with the Chairman as to whether it should be called in. There had to be some material issue for calling in a decision. The particular change in the constitution being made in Appendix 1 related to permission in principle which was not a planning consent but related to initial inquiries from applicants where the officers could give permission in principle for them to do further feasibility work before it came forward for planning permission. At the moment this power rested with the officer but was now being extended to councillors.

·         A Member commented that responsibility for reviewing the Constitution should be either under Audit and Governance or Standards and General Purposes not both Committees. In addition, the Opposition Group Leaders should be consulted on the changes to the Constitution. The Chairman clarified that the responsibility for making recommendations to Full Council did rest with the Standards and General Purposes Committee. However, because the Constitution was linked to the business of the Audit and Governance Committee any proposed changes were passed to them for comment. The other changes that had been suggested but were not included in the Appendix had been considered by the Working Group but not taken forward. Representations could be made when the final report was considered by Standards and General Purposes Committee and then submitted to Full Council for approval. The Member expressed concern that some Members of the Opposition Group were not called to ask their question at Full Council because of time pressures which did not allow them to air their views in full; it would be better to involve them at an earlier stage in the process. In response it was noted that if Opposition Members had any concerns with the running of Full Council they should contact the Chairman of the Council.

·         With regard to the anomaly in terms of the deadline for questions for Select Committees, this had been included in the changes to the constitution so that the public could submit their question after having sight of the agenda. This would be similar to the change made to the cabinet deadline for questions with 3 clear days.

·         A suggestion was made that Committees should elect Vice-Chairman rather than the Chairman appoint them.

·         Another Member commented that the role of the Vice-Chairman should be clarified.

·         In response to a question it was noted that the Constitution Working Group had met approximately three times as and when required.

·         A Member welcomed the changes and commented that the Constitution was a living document. Particular reference was made to considering changes for those councillors who worked and could not attend pre-arranged group visits where a video recording of the site visit could be made available.

It was proposed by Cllr B Chapple, seconded by Cllr R Carington and following a vote (with two abstentions);-

RESOLVED

1. That the proposed changes to the Constitution as set out in Appendix 1 be noted and endorsed; and

RECOMMENDED that Full Council

2. adopt the proposed changes; and

3. approve the appropriate delegations to the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Members’ Constitutional Working Group, to finalise the textual changes to the constitution following approval of the principles as set out in Appendix 1 of the report.