Agenda item

Purpose: This report is to notify Council of the work undertaken by the Constitution Review Task Group to date and to propose: an additional ordinary meeting of Council in March 2022; that the meeting of Council scheduled to take place on 3 March 2022 will deal purely with the 2022/23 Council budget and no other business; a response to Motions submitted by Councillor Lee Dillon proposing changes to the Constitution; certain changes to the Constitution. This report is in anticipation of wholesale changes to the Constitution, as expanded upon below, to include making some or all of the proposals set out permanent.

The Monitoring Officer introduced the report and acknowledged the significant work undertaken by the Constitution Review Task Group (‘Task Group’) to produce the report recommendations.

The Chair of the Task Group added that substantial consideration had gone into the proposals within the report. It was clarified that whilst some of the proposals would result in immediate permanent constitutional amendments, some had been put forward purely to impact the 2022 budget meeting and would likely form part of the general update and review of the constitution currently being undertaken.

In response to a proposal to re-order the budget agenda to allow more time to debate the revenue, the Executive Director (Resources) clarified that there was no flexibility within the agenda. Amendments made to the capital budget were likely to directly impact the revenue budget and consequently revenue would always need to be debated and agreed as a final item. 

In response to a suggestion that the table at 5.25 regarding political party time allocations may prove difficult to manage in practice, the Monitoring Officer explained that it was proposed that the time allocations would be allocated to each party in order, en bloc. Consequently it would be for each leader and group to manage that time accordingly.

In response to a suggestion to allow members to vote on individual amendments rather than the en bloc voting which had taken place at the 2021 budget meeting, the Monitoring Officer explained that budget meetings were subject to legislative requirements in relation to the manner of voting, necessitating the need for named votes. Consequently to allow a vote for each amendment had the potential to become unnecessarily time consuming.

In response to requests for a return to ‘in person’ meetings, both the Monitoring Officer and Chair of the Task Group explained that since the onset of the Covid pandemic, health and safety had been at the forefront for determining meeting arrangements. It was further commented that hiring an alternative venue to accommodate all members would have both cost and streaming implications. 

Members made the following comments and observations:

·         The proposal of a separate budget meeting was broadly welcomed;

·         It was agreed that the proposal outlined in Appendix C was too rigid, and the consensus view was to prefer the option outlined in Appendix D;

·         It was suggested that any budget meeting should allow for physical attendance, debate and exercise of voting rights by all members, rather than indicative voting; and

·         It was agreed that it was the responsibility of group leaders and members to ensure a full and reasonable budget debate within the timescale available.

The Monitoring Officer assured members that in relation to physical attendance at meetings, all options were being investigated to ensure an approved, lawful budget meeting for 2022. 

ACTION: The Monitoring Officer agreed to produce an indicative timetable report relating to the work of the Task Group for inclusion in the 17^th January agenda.

RESOLVED:the Committee recommended that Council:

·         approve recommendations (a)-(h) within the report; and

·         with reference to recommendation (d) approve the rules of procedure for the 2022 Budget Meeting of Council detailed at Appendix D.