Issue - meetings

(a)       That, until such time as the position is clarified by further legislation or case law, the following convention will be used, in addition to the legislation, to interpret whether a councillor has satisfied the 6 month rule:

‘Attendance by a councillor to observe, listen to or speak at any meetings of the Cabinet (or any of its sub-committees), a committee, a sub-committee, a working group or task and finish group or member workshop (whether the public is entitled to attend some or all of the meeting) will be deemed sufficient to satisfy the requirement to attend meetings contained within s.85 of the Local government Act 1972 (“the 6 month rule”)’; and

(b)       That Council be recommended to expressly confirm the authority of the Monitoring Officer to decide whether a councillor has complied with the 6 month rule.

The Chief Officer (Governance) introduced a report on the ‘6 Month Rule’.  He provided background information and advised that all councillors are required to attend, as a member, at least one meeting of full Council, Cabinet, a Committee or working group, every 6 months.  Failure to do so without prior approval from full Council results in disqualification. 

The Chief Officer referred to the situation in relation to a councillor who had attended an overview and scrutiny committee meeting, intending to participate as a member, only to find that she had not been nominated by her Group as a member of that committee.  However, the councillor remained at the meeting as an observer.  The Chief Officer referred to the legislation under S.85(1) and 85(2) of the Local Government Act 1972 and advised that it was not clear whether attendance as an observer was sufficient to satisfy the 6 month rule.  As the answer was unclear from the legislation and there was no relevant case law on the issue, the Committee was asked to establish the convention that would be used to judge this and future cases.

Councillor Tim Newhouse queried the attendance of the Councillor as an observer at the meeting of the overview and scrutiny Committee held in June 2015 and suggested that the Councillor should be disqualified as from 13 November 2015 as she was in breach of the 6 month rule.  He  proposed that the item be deferred to the next meeting of the Constitution Committee.  

Councillor Alex Aldridge commented on the need for ‘inclusiveness’ and to encourage greater participation from young people in how the Council conducted its business.   He expressed concern that the 6 month rule did not take into account attendance at the Planning Committee to speak on Ward issues, site visits, meetings, attendance as an observer in any committee, and the work undertaken by a Councillor on behalf of their Ward.

Councillor Aaron Shotton proposed that the meeting be adjourned to give  Members the opportunity to reflect on the issues raised during discussion and this was agreed by the Committee. 

The meeting was adjourned at  2.40 p.m. and reconvened at 2.50 pm. 

Councillor Alex Aldridge said that on reflection the recommendation contained in the Chief Officer’s report offered a better solution and therefore he would withdraw his earlier proposition and move the recommendation.  He did so and this was duly seconded.

The Chief Officer  reiterated the lack of case law and the need for a commonsense approach to resolve the problem now facing the Council.  Concerning the accuracy of minutes, the Chief Officer referred to the standard textbook on local government meeting procedure.

Councillor Aaron Shotton commented on the need for clarity on attendance at meetings.  He said that there was no doubt that the Councillor  referred to had attended the meeting of the overview and scrutiny committee in question in good faith. His particular concern was that work carried out in the Ward by Members was not reflected in the Local Government Act  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20