Agenda item

Webcasting of Committee Meetings

Report by the Director of Law and Assurance.

 

The Committee is asked to consider aspects of the County Council’s usage of webcasting – namely the amount of webcasting undertaken, who should take the decision as to whether a meeting should be webcast and the criteria on which the decision should be based.

Minutes:

5.1     The Committee was asked to consider a report by the Director of Law and Assurance on aspects of the County Council’s use of webcasting – the amount of webcasting undertaken, who should take the decision whether a meeting should be webcast and the criteria on which the decision should be based (copy appended to the signed minutes).

 

5.2     Members supported the webcasting of more meetings and felt that the introduction of the new mobile webcasting kit, which enabled meetings in rooms other than the Council Chamber to be webcast, was an improvement.  It was felt that in a county the size of West Sussex it was important to make decision-making as open and transparent as possible and webcasting also reduced the need for travel.

 

5.3     Members asked about the number of hours in the current webcasting contract the Director of Law and Assurance said discussions were underway with the webcasting provider about the options for increasing the annual allocation at the lower charging rate.

 

5.4     The Committee discussed the options put forward in paragraph 2.1 to 2.3 of the report. 

 

5.5     Members supported the proposal in paragraph 2.1 of the report that there should be a presumption in favour of webcasting all or part of all meetings of the Planning Committee, Select Committees and formal meetings of the Cabinet.  A proposal that there should be a presumption that all meetings of the Regulation, Audit and Accounts Committee should also be webcast was not seconded.

 

5.6     In relation to the options put forward in paragraph 2.2 of the report as to who would be able to waive the presumption, a proposal that it should be the chairman or vice-chairman or, for select committees, the Business Planning Group (BPG) was not seconded.  Instead the Committee agreed that the decision to waive presumption should be the chairman and vice-chairman and that, for select committees, if a difference of opinion should arise between those two members, the decision should be referred to members of the BPG who should be consulted via email.

 

5.7     The Committee agreed the criteria used to inform the decision as to whether to webcast all or part of a meeting or to waive the presumption, as set out in paragraph 2.3 of the report.

 

5.8     The Leader requested that there should be a report to the Committee at the end of the year setting out the number of meetings webcast with viewing figures.

 

5.9     Resolved – That the County Council be recommended

 

(1)     That there should be a presumption in favour of webcasting all meetings of Planning Committee, Select Committees and formal meetings of the Cabinet;

 

(2)     That the decision to waive the presumption of webcasting should rest with the chairman and vice-chairman and that, for select committees, if a difference of opinion should arise between those two members, the decision should be referred to the members of the Business Planning Group;

 

(3)     That the criteria to be used to inform the decision as to whether to webcast all or part of a meeting, be as set out in paragraph 2.3 of the report; and

 

(4)     That a report be brought to the Committee at the end of the year setting out the number of meetings webcast together with viewing figures.

Supporting documents: