Agenda item

The Committee received a report from the Head of Legal Practice and Monitoring Officer on the review of the Council constitution after nine months of operating with the revised Leader/Cabinet arrangements. The Deputy Leader of the Council also presented a report on the revised terms of reference for the Equalities Panel (Inclusion and Equity Panel).

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

 

Move to new governance model

i.      Any recommendation to move to a single Overview and Scrutiny Committee should be taken after seeking views from the Chairs and Members of current committees.

ii.    Nine months was not sufficient time to draw conclusions from the new scrutiny process.

iii.   The report compared Cambridge to other councils with just one scrutiny committee, but some councils have as many as four. There could be grounds for having more than two.

iv.  With Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) approximately two years away, further constitutional changes should only be made if they were operationally compelling.

v.    A dedicated Scrutiny Officer had recently been appointed. The current structure ought to continue to give the officer time to familiarise themselves with it.

vi.  The committees had not yet carried out the full spectrum of responsibilities, for example there had been no deep dives. There was still much to do to properly assess the effectiveness of the current system.

vii. Would be keen to see the governance model reviewed annually.

viii.                 The Committee should look at the terms of reference of the Housing Advisory Board. Could it become a scrutiny committee?

ix.  A single scrutiny committee may put an excessive workload on members.

x.    Two Committees provided more focus on specific issues.

xi.  The new governance structure could leave minority groups and independent councillors without an effective voice inside Council.

xii. Political groups should be given the opportunity to review the proposals.

 

Protocol on Member / Officer Relations

xiii.                  The new version did not highlight sufficiently the importance of political impartiality for officers working closely with the cabinet.

xiv.                 Concerned that the new protocol could discourage Members from approaching officers directly.

xv.The call centre suggestion may not effectively support the democratic role of a councillor in carrying out casework.

xvi.                 The new member induction should include training on how to work with officers, which should also be offered to existing Members.

xvii.               Where officers are required to deal with difficult situations at public events, they should be encouraged to rely on Members for support.

xviii.              Welcomed the emphasis on communications with ward councillors. Officers should reach out to ward councillors for input when devising communications with residents and groups in wards. Better joint working should be promoted.

xix.                 Section 3.2 of the existing protocol should be included in the new version.

xx.Any ‘who does what’ document should include more than just Directors.

xxi.                 The Member role on a regulatory committee should to be made clearer in relation to the ways that Members can deal with planning or licensing matters.

 

Supplementary Estimates Process

xxii.               Could the supplementary estimates be indexed?

xxiii.              The capital project definition should include the total projected cost of a project, not just the element coming forward as a supplementary estimate.

xxiv.             Could officers highlight occasions on which it had been a problem not to have the supplementary estimates in place in the last year?

xxv.               Should supplementary estimate decisions be brought into the forward plan?

xxvi.             Could the terminology be changed to something more easily understandable than supplementary estimates?

 

Equalities Panel

xxvii.            It should be clear in the new Equity and Inclusion Panel terms of reference that the changes are intended to remove barriers.

xxviii.          The change to an Equity and Inclusion Panel was a logical progression.

xxix.             The process for selection of members to the Panel was unclear in the current document – it implies that the Leader of the Council would select all members.

xxx.               The Green Group would like the ability to be flexible with regard to who attends the Equity and Inclusion Panel, to be able to send the most appropriate person for the agenda items.

 

Officers said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

Protocol on Member / Officer Relations

i.      The intention was to provide officers with guidance on when to engage and when to inform ward councillors.

ii.    The current code of conduct was written pre-social media and the new version addresses that.

iii.   The section around familiarity could be rewritten.

iv.  The intention of the guidance is to determine whether an issue could be dealt with via email and whether the information was already available online. Most cases that couldn’t be dealt with via such channels would be complex and require guidance from a senior officer on how to respond, therefore ensuring junior officers were not put under undue pressure.

v.    The intention was not to undermine the casework process, however requests for service would be most effectively addressed through the relevant pre-existing channels.

vi.  Complaints should be logged directly into the complaints system and complex cases should be tracked.

vii. Permission to act on behalf of a resident should be collected.

viii.                 Could look to change the response time from 7 days to 5.

ix.  Officers agreed to provide a revised version to members.

 

Supplementary Estimates Process

x.    With regard to uprating, the intention was to include clear, round numbers in the constitution.

xi.  Raising the limit of the supplementary estimate would go through the usual constitutional change process.

xii. Guardrails would be in place to ensure any related proposals were made clear.

xiii.                 There would be a requirement for the Section 151 Officer to sign off the process.

xiv.                 Specific examples of occasions where a supplementary estimate would have been required in the past were difficult to obtain as the Council had found ways to manage without this process. However, work could be delayed if it had to go to Full Council as a budget bid.

xv.The supplementary estimate process would make the Council more agile, while maintaining openness and transparency.

xvi.                 This would not be a process for taking key decisions but would be subject to the usual Cabinet publication requirements.

 

Equalities Panel

xvii.               Confirmed that Group Leaders would be able to select Members.

 

Civic Affairs and Audit Committee RESOLVED (unanimously) to RECOMMEND to the Annual General Meeting of the Council that:

 

1.    The revised Terms of Reference for the Equalities Panel (to be renamed the Inclusion and Equity Panel) be approved and incorporated into the Council Constitution.

 

Civic Affairs and Audit Committee RESOLVED (unanimously):

 

2.    That the draft Member/Officer Protocol be revised in parts and circulated to all Members for comment by the end of March, with a further report to be brought back to the Committee before any recommendation for approval is made to the Annual General Meeting.

 

3.    That the provisions relating to the limited authority for Cabinet to approve supplementary estimates, specifically additional revenue and capital expenditure up to a defined threshold, be reviewed and circulated to Members for comment by the end of March, with a further report to be presented to the Committee before any recommendation is made to the Annual General Meeting.

 

4.    To note that the Council’s Constitution will continue to be kept under regular review, and that any further proposed amendments will be reported to the Committee in due course.

 

5.    To note the draft meeting calendar and provide any comments in advance of the calendar being presented to the Annual General Meeting for formal approval.

 

6.    To request that Full Council approve a full review of the Terms of Reference for the Housing Advisory Board be undertaken, with any proposed changes to be brought forward for approval by the Council at a future meeting when appropriate.