Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Committee Room 1 & 2, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ. View directions
Contact: Martin Whelan Committee Manager
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies for absence Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Herbert and Councillor Pitt. Councillor Brierley attended as an alternate member for Councillor Pitt. |
|
Minutes of previous meeting PDF 51 KB Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 12 September were approved as a true and accurate record of the meeting. |
|
Declarations of Interest Members
are asked to declare at this stage any interests that they may have in any of
the following items on the agenda. If any member is unsure whether or not
they should declare an interest on a particular matter, they are requested to
seek advice from the Head of Legal Services before the meeting.
Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
Public Questions Minutes: There were no public questions. |
|
Local Government Pension Scheme - Employers Discretions PDF 76 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The committee received a report presented by the Support Services Manager regarding the Local Government Pension Scheme – Employers Discretion. The Support Services Manager tabled a summary of the changes. Resolved (Unanimously) i. To approve the proposed policy statement on employer discretions as per appendix A of the committee report. ii. To authorise the Head of Human Resources and Director of Resources to determine decisions relating to the merits of individual cases. iii. That Council officers will continue to review the statement every 3 years and/or in line with changes to the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) as advised by the Local Government Pensions Committee (LGPC) and the Administering Authority (Cambridgeshire County Council), and any recommended changes will go before Civic Affairs for approval. |
|
The Localism Act and the Committee System PDF 93 KB Minutes: The committee received a report on the Localism Act and the Committee System, presented by the Democratic Services Manager. The committee made the following comments on the report i. The content was interesting, but lacked sufficient analysis of the implications (positive and negative) of reverting to a committee system. ii. It was noted that Brighton and Hove Council had only retained the committee system until relatively recently due to a loophole in the legislation relating to elected mayors. It was also highlighted that the executive model didn’t work well in councils where the administration had a small or a non-existent majority. iii. The benefits highlighted by the London Borough of Sutton as result of their transition to a committee system were questioned. It was suggested that many of the highlighted benefits were already been delivered through the Area Committee system in Cambridge. iv. It was noted that all the councils that had transferred to date to the committee system were large authorities. v. The advantages of previous City Board, which had operated from 1973 through to 2002, were highlighted. It was explained the City Board provided political overview of all forms of decision-making including regulatory. vi. Disappointment was expressed that the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 had not been repealed and therefore precluded a reversion to the previous form of executive arrangements. vii. Clarification was requested whether the principle of a policy framework could be retained if the Council reverted to a committee system. The Head of Legal Services agreed to check the details, but explained that logically the principle of a policy framework would be removed, but that there was nothing precluding something similar being built into the committee delegations. It was agreed that officers would check the details and report back to members of the committee. viii. It was highlighted that Kent County Council had also recently adopted a hybrid system, which was similar to the model already operating in the city. ix. It was agreed that the City Council wasn’t typical of other Councils, and that were many opportunities for all Councillors to actively participate in the development and influencing of the details of policy. x. With the possibility of there being a close political balance for the foreseeable future, it was suggested that the governance arrangements should be kept under review but at this stage no change was required. xi. The possibility of confusion on the part of the public was also highlighted, if it wasn’t clear where decisions were being taken. xii. Members were reminded that in the event of the Council resolving to amend its governance arrangements significantly, no further change would be permitted for five years without recourse to a referendum. Resolved (Unanimously) to agree that no further work is required on adopting a different arrangement for scrutiny and decision making for the reasons set out in the committee report. |
|
Committee dates - 2013/14 PDF 48 KB The 2013/14 meeting
calendar is presented for approval. A number of
committees are responsible for approving their own committee dates and this
process has either already been completed or will be completed over the coming
weeks. Due to congestion in the calendar suggested dates have been included for
the following meetings: ·
Joint
Development Control Committee and Joint Development Control Committee
Development Control Forum ·
Area
Committees 2013/14 meeting
calendar The underlying
structure of the 2013/14 meeting calendar was reviewed in readiness for the
production of the indicative calendar in September 2011, with the intention of
improving the consistency of meeting dates. This primarily applies to planning
related committees, which are proposed to run on a consistent cycle of ·
1st
week in the month – Planning Committee ·
2nd
week in the month – Development Control Forum ·
3rd
week in the month – Joint Development Control Committee ·
4th
week in the month – Joint Development Control Committee DCF Other minor changes
have been made to reflect ·
Confirmation
of the dates for autumn party political conferences and school holidays. ·
Removal of
Standards Committee as a committee of the council. East Area
Committee East Area Committee
is currently meeting on a 6 weekly cycle as a trial. The outcome of the trial,
and a decision whether to continue with this cycle is not planned to be made
until the spring of 2013. The suggested dates are based on a 8 week cycle. School Holidays All meetings have
been checked against the published Cambridgeshire County Council school holiday
dates for 2012/13 and 2013/14. Elections in
2014 The local elections
are provisionally scheduled for 1st May 2014 and there are also
European Elections in June 2014. Normally the local elections would be moved to
the June date, however the calendar is based on the current circumstances. A revised calendar
will be presented to Civic Affairs at a later date if required, to amend the
calendar if the Local Elections are moved to coincide with the European
Elections.
Additional documents: Minutes: The committee received a report from the Committee Manager regarding the committee dates for 2013/14. The committee requested i. Further discussion on the North Area Committee dates. It was agreed to do this at the next North Area Committee. ii. The production of a draft calendar for 2014/15 for consideration at a future meeting. iii. The circulation of the confirmed dates to Councillors as soon as practical. Resolved (Unanimously) to approve the committee dates for 2013/14. |
|
Members Allowances 2013/14 PDF 25 KB Members Allowances for May 2013-April 2014 At its meeting on 1 February 2012, in
agreeing to recommend to Council the continuation of the existing members
allowance scheme for a further municipal year, the Committee also agreed that
the scheme be reviewed as part of the Leader’s
review of the Council’s decision-making processes. The report elsewhere on this agenda recommends that the Council’s
decision-making processes are retained with no change. Therefore, committee is asked whether the
allowances scheme should also be retained with no change. Background It was in the 2007/08 municipal year that
the current monetary value for the basic allowance entitlement to all 42
councillors was set. The current
monetary value for the variety of special responsibility allowances
entitlement, received by a majority of councillors, were also first adopted for
the 2007/08 year with some minor changes since to certain allowances, for
example to reflect annual electoral results. The total budget for basic and
special responsibility allowances is £252,500. Before councillors can make or amend an allowances
scheme, they must have regard to the recommendations made in relation to it by
an independent remuneration panel. By being required to have regard to the views of ‘lay
people’, who will have researched the issues, it is expected that councillors
would more carefully consider the justification for any increase in allowances
they receive. The
allowances scheme has been considered annually by the Independent Remuneration
Panel up to March 2011, when the Panel
recommended continuation of the existing scheme, primarily because of the
economic climate at the time. Also in
March 2011, the Committee agreed that the Panel did not need to meet prior to
adoption of the 2012/13 scheme if circumstances had not changed. The committee’s deliberations on the work of
the Independent Remuneration Panel since 2007/08 and the scheme adopted has
left some issues which while the scheme remains unchanged, will continue to be
unresolved. Any changes to the scheme
however are difficult to address in isolation without impacting either on the
current standstill budget or on the other allowances within the scheme. Any changes committee were to propose would
first require input from the Panel and then agreement by the Council. Recommendation For 2013/14 therefore, the scheme could
again be retained if the committee agrees to retain the decision making
structures (set out in the report elsewhere on the agenda) and there are no
changes in the composition of the Council for the new municipal year. Accordingly the committee is requested to
recommend to the Council: That the current Members Allowances Scheme (attached)
be continued for the 2013/14 municipal year.
Minutes: The committee received a report from the Democratic Services Manager regarding the Members Allowances Scheme for 2013/14. The committee made the following comments on the report. i. It was agreed that references to obsolete technology and associated peripherals such as fax and fax rolls should be deleted from the scheme. ii. It was agreed that the provisions to withhold allowances partially or fully were no longer valid as it formed part of the former standards regime, so should be deleted. iii. Clarification was requested on the basis for calculating the basic allowance, and whether this was based on the principle of the living wage. It was also suggested that the current level of allowances could put off potential councillors from standing for election. The concern was acknowledged, but it was agreed that the existing allowances were at a low level, and without external intervention such as a national allowances scheme, it would be difficult for the council to make significant changes. iv. Officers agreed to investigate why travel warrants for members were encouraged rather than reclaiming the cost via expenses.
Resolved (Nem Com) to recommend to the Council: i. That the current Members Allowances Scheme subject to the small amendments in i. and .ii above and be continued for the 2013/14 municipal year. |
|
A review of the Annual Canvass and Publication of Register of Electors PDF 68 KB Minutes: The committee received an update on the review of the Annual Canvass and Publication of Register of Electors. It was acknowledged that the circumstances were unique, however it was suggested that similar issues could arise with the introduction of individual voter registration. The committee thanked the officers involved in the organisation of the canvass and the publication of the register of electors. |
|
Feedback on the Police and Crime Commissioner Election held on 15th November Oral Report Minutes: The Returning Officer presented an oral report regarding the Police and Crime Commissioner election held on 15th November. The committee were advised · Turnout in the city had been 14.7%, which had compared with East Cambridgeshire District Council and Fenland District Council (Lowest – 12.9%) and Peterborough City Council (17.4%). · Turnout at city polling stations had varied between 5.7% and 15.45%, with 46.31% of postal votes returned. · The ballot papers were verified before midnight at the Guildhall. · The count had been undertaken at Soham, with no overall winner after the first round. The count had taken 6 hours with a 15% turn out. Concerns regarding the capacity for managing similar counts with potentially larger turnouts were raised. · It was noted that one complaint had been received regarding a Presiding Officer, but that the majority of complaints were beyond the control of the Returning Officer such as lack of information regarding the process and candidates. · It was explained that a member of staff from the Electoral Commission had attended the verification and count, and had raised no issues. It was agreed that if the Electoral Commission produced a report or supplied feedback, that this would be circulated to members of Civic Affairs Committee. · The Returning Officer thanked the Elections Team for their hard work before and during the election. The committee made the following comments on the report i. Concerns were raised that the count was operating as 6 individual counts, with potentially inconsistent approaches. The possibility of greater use of existing technology to reduce the cost of future counts was suggested. ii. The 2nd stage count excluded the majority of the 2nd preference votes, as they didn’t relate to candidates who had progressed to the 2nd stage. iii. Concerns were raised about the turnout implications for 2016, as not all districts currently had scheduled elections. iv. Clarification was requested on whether the count could have continued overnight and been completed by the morning. The Returning Officer clarified the following points · The centralised count had been the decision of the Police Area Returning Officer. · The size of the other districts would make it very difficult to have an overnight count, particularly as the 2nd stage couldn’t begin until all districts had declared. It was also suggested that the spaces left blank at the top and bottom of the papers should be restricted to minimise the risk of “write in” candidates. |