Agenda item

Report by the Director of Law and Assurance.

The County Council at its meeting on 19 July 2019 referred a motion by Dr Walsh on the system of Council governance to the Governance Committee for consideration.  Members are asked to consider a response to the motion for submission to the meeting of the County Council on 18 October 2019.

22.1     The Committee was reminded that the County Council, at its meeting on 19 July 2019, had referred a motion by Dr Walsh on the system of Council governance to the Governance Committee for consideration.  Members considered a report by the Director of Law and Assurance (copy appended to the signed minutes) and were asked to consider a response to the motion for submission to the meeting of the County Council on 18 October 2019.

22.2     Dr Walsh said that his reason for bringing the motion was that, in his view, there was cross-party dissatisfaction with the system of council governance.  He had worked under both the cabinet and committee systems.  He believed there are shortcomings to the cabinet system and, at Arun District Council, where he was now leader, there are plans to return to the committee system from May next year. He said he did not feel it was democratic that the majority of the County Council’s decisions were taken by Cabinet Members. Scrutiny is ineffective as its recommendations are frequently ignored or disregarded. Members of the public expect their elected representatives to be involved in decisions on their behalf and are puzzled to hear that one member makes a decision.  A return to the committee system would allow all members to play a part in decision-making and be held to account for those decisions.  Dr Walsh said, in his view, this would improve the image of the County Council and the quality of decision-making.

22.3     Members expressed a range of views on the pros and cons of the two systems.  Mr Burrett commented that Crawley Borough Council had considered reverting to the committee system but had concluded that the cabinet system was a faster and more efficient system of decision-making and easier to understand. He noted that very few councils had reverted to the committee system, particularly at county-level.

22.4     Mr Jones said he was open-minded about the two systems.  The cabinet system streamlined decision-making but in his view Cabinet Members too often ignored the comments of select committees and Business Planning Groups rejected too many call-in requests.  The recent Ofsted inspection had raised a question as to the effectiveness of scrutiny.

22.5     The Leader said that under the old committee system it had often taken a long time to take decisions and there had been negotiation behind the scenes before meetings.  In her view, reverting to the committee system would be a retrograde step. In relation to scrutiny she felt the issue was around the members not being curious or outward looking enough. She felt some improvements could be made without changing the whole system. The Forward Plan of key decisions had not existed under the committee system and there should be an earlier review of these decisions to improve transparency of decision-making.  In her view it would be indulgent, given other priorities, to consider the disruption of reverting to the old system.  Instead the Council should concentrate on the review of scrutiny and an earlier preview of decisions.

22.6     Mr Lanzer commented that the original purpose of the cabinet system was that the number and scale of decisions needing to be taken by larger councils meant the committee system would be too slow.  There is a risk with the committee system of working in silos without the benefit of cross-portfolio thinking.  With the cabinet system there is a high degree of visibility provided by a combination of the Forward Plan, task and finish groups, select committee preview and decision call-in.  The public is interested in the timeliness and efficiency of decision-making and, in his view, improvements should be made to the current system rather than reverting to the old, inward-looking committee system.

22.7     It was proposed by Dr Walsh and seconded by Mr Jones that the Governance Committee should take a neutral position and not express an opinion to inform the debate at the County Council. The proposal was put to a recorded vote under Standing Order 3.35.

For the proposal – 2 (Mr Jones and Dr Walsh)

Against the proposal – 5 (Mr Burrett, Ms Goldsmith, Mr Lanzer, Mr Mitchell and Mr Patel)

Abstentions – 1 (Mrs Duncton)

22.8     The proposal was lost.

22.9     The following resolution was proposed by Mr Lanzer and seconded by Mr Burrett:

‘The view of this Committee is that it does not support a return to the committee system.’

22.10  The proposal was put to a recorded vote under Standing Order 3.35.

For the proposal – 5 (Mr Burrett, Ms Goldsmith, Mr Lanzer, Mr Mitchell and Mr Patel)

Against the proposal – 2 (Mr Jones and Dr Walsh)

Abstentions – 1 (Mrs Duncton)

22.11  The proposal was carried.

22.12  Resolved – That the view of this Committee is that it does not support a return to the committee system.