Agenda item

To consider a report of the Governance Committee a proposed amendment to the Council Procedure Rules for the scope of motions to full Council (attached).

Procedural motion during debate that the matter proceed straight to a vote CARRIED by 42 votes to 6.

Amendment by the Independent Residents’ Group NOT CARRIED by 41 votes to 6.

Deemed motion by the Administration CARRIED by 42 votes to 6. 

A report of the Governance Committee invited Council to agree some amendments to the Council procedure rules as regards the scope of motions accepted for debate at full Council. It was recommended that the Council procedure rules be amended to ensure that complaints against a Councillor or Council Officer (which were subject to separate procedures) were not accepted as part of motions to Council. It was also proposed that the authority to reject such motions be delegated to the Council’s Monitoring Officer.

           Deemed Motion on behalf of the Administration

That the report be adopted and its recommendations carried into effect.

Amendment on behalf of the Independent Residents’ Group

The Governance report proposes taking away the Mayor’s power to have the final say on whether a Motion is acceptable and instead  proposes giving the final say to the Monitoring Officer.

This is anti-democratic because motions are a political matter and it’s the responsibility of the Mayor rather than the Legal Officer to have the final say.

Thus Council agrees to send this report back to the Governance committee for further consideration because it is wrong in principal and practice to delegate political decision making to unelected council officers!

During the course of debate, a procedural motion that the matter proceed straight to the vote was CARRIED by 42 votes to 6 (see division 1).

The amendment by the Independent Residents’ Group was NOT CARRIED by 42 votes to 6 (see division 2).

The deemed motion by the Administration was CARRIED by 42 votes to 6 (see division 3) and it was accordingly RESOLVED:

1.      That Council Procedure Rule 11.4 of the Council’s Constitution be revised the read the following:

11.4 Scope

(a) Motions must be relevant to a matter in which the Council has powers or duties or which affects the borough.

(b) The Monitoring Officer may reject a Motion if it:

i. is not about a matter for which the local authority has a responsibility or which affects the borough;

ii. is defamatory, derogatory, vexatious, scurrilous, frivolous or offensive;

iii. is substantially the same as a motion which has been put at a meeting of Full Council in the past six months;

iv. requires the disclosure of confidential or exempt information;

v. seeks to pursue or further a complaint against a Councillor or an Officer of the Council, where other channels already exist for the determination of complaints.

c). Where it would assist the proper or efficient conduct of the Council’s business, the Mayor may direct that two or more motions relating to the same matter shall be debated together, with a separate vote on each one at the conclusion of the debate.

(d) The Monitoring Officer shall be entitled to clarify the wording of motions and amendments with the proposer before committing the motion or amendment to the agenda and shall be entitled to amend the wording of a motion or amendment in consultation with the proposer prior to the meeting to clarify, correct, or make sense of the particular wording. The Monitoring Officer shall consult the Mayor if agreement on such clarification cannot be reached and the Mayor may direct that the motion or amendment shall not be included in the summons.

2.   That the Council’s Monitoring Officer be authorised to make the necessary change to the Council’s Constitution, should the proposal be agreed by Council.