The Monitoring Officer reported on the findings of the Constitution Working Group and Democratic Services Committee and sought approval of amendments to the Constitution.

The Monitoring Officer explained that a request had been received from an Elected Member for a review of the Constitution.  In accordance with Article 15 of the constitution the Monitoring Officer will monitor and review the operation of the Constitution to ensure that the aims and principles of the Constitution are given full effect.  Any changes will need the approval of Council based on the recommendations of the Monitoring Officer.

The review of the Constitution specifically requested the following to be considered:

1)    The time period for questions and motions be re-instated at 5 days, now that suitable resources are in place to allow timely translation to Welsh;

2)    That following the presentations and announcements by Cabinet members, the Leader, and Chief Executive, Members be allowed to ask non tabled questions for a period of 15 minutes;

3)    That the three largest opposition groups, be given 3 minutes (taken from Development Control Committee 3-minute rule) to make announcements or presentations to Council;

4)    The timing of Council meetings

The Monitoring Officer reported that the Democratic Services Committee established a cross party Constitution Working Group to review the Constitution, which met on two occasions. 

The Working Group recommended that the time period for the submission of questions and motions remain at 10 clear working days. The Democratic Services Committee further added that there be clearer policing of supplementary questions to ensure they are relevant to the original question and that they are short and concise.  The Working Group in considering announcements made at Council, recommended that an amendment be made to the Constitution to re-title the Leader’s Report to that of Leader’s Announcements and that the current announcements made by the Cabinet be shortened.  The Working Group recommended that all Members of Council receive replies to written questions 24 hours prior to the meeting of Council where practicable.  The reply will be recorded in the minutes of that meeting of Council.  The Working Group considered that announcements by Opposition Group Leaders could give rise to political statements being made and did not wish to pursue announcements being made by the Leaders of the 3 largest Opposition Groups.  In relation to the timing of Council meetings, an electronic vote was conducted on conclusion of the meeting of Council on 24 July 2019 as to whether or not there was an appetite to explore evening meetings.  Of the 45 Members present, 17 Members voted in favour of holding evening meetings.  The Working Group recommended that as the vote was lost, the holding of evening meetings would not be explored further until the next administration. 

The Monitoring Officer informed Council that an opportunity was taken as part of the review to review the Council’s call-in procedure to ensure it was working effectively within the current Scrutiny structure.   Research had been conducted by the Democratic Services Team on the Call-in process in place at other local authorities in Wales.  The Working Group recommended that the period of notice after publication of a decision be extended from the current 3 clear working days to 5 clear working days in order to have greater transparency and for backbench Members to have a greater opportunity to call-in a decision.  The Working Group recommended that the time period for holding an Overview and Scrutiny Committee remains at within 5 clear working days.  The Working Group recommended that any Member including a Chairperson who calls-in a decision is excluded from the decision making at that Committee meeting, but would be invited to give evidence to the Committee in support of the Call-in request.    

The Monitoring Officer informed Council that the Democratic Services Committee at its meeting on 17 October 2019 considered the findings and approved the recommendations of the Constitution Working Group for consideration by Council.   

Councillor Voisey who had submitted the request to the Monitoring Officer informed Council that he has done so as he believed that the public were not getting questions answered in the public domain.  The Member believed that the increase in the time period for questions and motions to 10 days was temporary and should be reinstated to 5 days.  The Member also believed that the announcements by the Executive and Chief Executive could be dealt with by press releases.  The report of the Leader gave the opportunity for Members to ask questions of the Leader, this opportunity would not be afforded to Members if the Leader’s Report was re-titled Leader’s Announcements.  In relation to announcements by Opposition Groups, the Member stated that this was a political chamber and Members have a right to make political statements.  He believed that the request to question the Leader and Cabinet had been missed from the report and requested that this should be reviewed.  The Member also requested that the timing of Council meetings start on a proportional basis according to the preferences of Members. 

Councillor Venables who chaired the Constitution Working Group and is also the Chairperson of the Democratic Services Committee commented that the Working Group had met on 2 occasions and had robustly scrutinised the elements of the Constitution subject to the review.  Councillor Howells who is a Member of the Constitution Working Group and Democratic Services Committee commented that the Working Group had looked at research undertaken by the Democratic Services Team and had considered the options available. He reiterated that the Group was a cross party group.

Councillor Giffard expressed concern at the recommendation that any Member including a Chairperson who calls-in a decision is excluded from the decision making at that Committee meeting, but would be invited to give evidence to the Committee in support of the Call-in request. He expressed concern that Committees considering a Call-in would become imbalanced if the Members signing the Call-in were excluded from the decision making at the Committee.  The Monitoring Officer informed Council that the Constitution Working Group had considered the Call-in process during the review as there had been a call in during the period and it was felt lessons could be learnt.It was considered that to avoid the perception of impartiality and pre-determination Members who call in a decision should not sit on the Committee considering the matter.  The Monitoring Officer informed Council that with the ever increasing use of social media the perception of the public had to be considered.

The Monitoring Officer informed Council that a large number of Members had signed the most recent Call-in which could have led to the meeting being inquorate if they had all declared that they had pre-determined.

Councillor Watts considered that Members should have the ability to ask non tabled questions of the Executive.  The Monitoring Officer informed Council that Constitution Working Group had concluded that the Cabinet Member may not have the detail to fully respond to questions being put at the meeting. They felt it was more appropriate to ask tabled questions to give the opportunity for a comprehensive answer to be prepared.   Councillor Venables informed Council that all elements of the review had been considered robustly by the Constitution Working Group.  Councillor Patel stated that she had attended a meeting of the Working Group and had explained that as a Cabinet Member she would like a response to a question to be correct.  She believed Cabinet Members would not be in possession of that level of detail at meetings of Council.  Councillor Watts believed that if Members did not have the opportunity to ask questions, that debate was nullified and Members could not voice their opinions.  The Mayor informed Council that the Member asking the question is able to ask a supplementary question and two further questions can be asked by Members. 

Councillor T Thomas believed that all Members of Council should have been able to contribute to the review of the Constitution.  The Mayor advised that the review had been delegated to the cross party working group by the Democratic Services Committee. 

Councillor T Thomas also believed that the increase in the timescale for submitting questions and motions was a temporary due to the implementation of the Welsh Language Standards. 

Councillor N Clarke also expressed concern that Members signing a Call-in request could be excluded from sitting on the Committee hearing the Call-in and considered that the number of Members sitting on Overview and Scrutiny Committees should be increased to avoid Committee becoming inquorate. 

Councillor Burnett welcomed Cabinet Members being able to make announcements and to present good news items and felt political statements were not made during the announcements. 

Councillor Penhale Thomas felt that there should be policing of supplementary questions and welcomed replies to Questions being sent to Members 24 hours before the meeting.  He also welcomed shorter announcements by Cabinet Members, but believed that announcements should also be extended to all political groups and also commented that this is a political chamber. 

Councillor M Clarke commented that the purpose of Call-in is for Members to have another look at a decision and felt that the administration should not be afraid to have another look at a decision it was to make.  He also considered that the administration could have a pre-disposition on a decision it intended to make.  He stated that Call-in requests were rare and that Committees would act responsibly. 

Councillor Voisey commented that a 15 minutes period for non-tabled questions should be allowed and that Cabinet Members are experienced and are supported by officers.  He expressed concern that he had not been asked to attend meetings of the Constitution Working Group and that its minutes were not available to Members.  The Monitoring Officer advised that the matters raised by Councillor Voisey had been referred to the Democratic Services Committee which delegated that matters to the Constitution Working Group it had established. 

Councillor Spanswick considered that Members should declare an interest if they had pre-determined or were pre-disposed in relation to a decision which had been called-in and what was needed was a review of the scrutiny process. 

Councillor Vidal considered that the views of the 17 Members who had voted in favour of evening meetings should have been taken on board.  The Monitoring Officer informed that this was an informal vote as the Constitution Working Group wanted an indicative view of Members.

Councillor Webster stated that she attended Overview and Scrutiny Committees with an open mind and left politics at the door.  She also stated that Members need to be mindful of comments which they make on social media.  The Monitoring Officer informed Council that queries had been received from members of the public as to whether Members had pre-determined as a result of comments which had been made on social media. 

Councillor PA Davies stated that the recommendations made by the Constitution Working Group to the Democratic Services Committee were cross party.  She also stated that translations had to be accurate and timely.

The Leader stated that the Constitution Working Group was a cross party group and that his Group had received feedback on its work as part of the review.  He stated that purpose of Council was not ask questions of Members but to make decisions and set policy.  He also stated that the Constitution Working Group had been tasked by the Democratic Services Committee to come up with recommendations and that the Working Group had tried to protect Members in calling-in a decision. Councillor Penhale Thomas informed Council that no member of his Group sits on the Working Group.  He also believed that Members need to be able to ask strategic questions at Council.                

A proposal was received from Councillor Watts that the proposals for the Call-in process be referred back to the Democratic Services Committee.  This was not seconded and fell.

A proposal was received from Councillor Giffard for the removal of paragraph 4.7.4 of the report. He requested assurances that the Council believes that a Call-in will always be heard by a politically balanced Committee.  This was seconded by Councillor N Clarke.

The Monitoring Officer informed Council that paragraph 4.7.4 would not be implemented and further consideration would be given to the Call In process.

RESOLVED:           That Council:    

(1)           Noted the research and work undertaken by the Constitution Working Group on behalf of the Democratic Services Committee;

(2)        Approved the recommendations made by the Working Group and amend the Constitution accordingly with the exception of paragraph 4.7.4

(3)        Delegated authority to the Monitoring Officer to make minor amendments to the Constitution to include amending typographical and drafting errors, updating legislative changes and drafting improvements to enhance clarity and remove minor anomalies.