Minutes:
5.1 |
The Committee received verbal submissions from a range of witnesses in order to review any information which would help the Committee make decisions when developing the new Committee System.
|
|
It’s Our City
|
5.2 |
Ruth Hubbard from It’s Our City attended the meeting virtually and gave a verbal submission to the Committee. A written submission was also circulated to the Committee, prior to the meeting.
|
5.3 |
Key points to note from Ruth Hubbard’s verbal submission were-
- Build the legitimacy of the Council. - Make better decisions. - Be more democratic. - Improve relationships with Stakeholders and Public.
|
5.4 |
A Members of Committee asked a question and the following response were provided by Ruth Hubbard:-
|
5.5 |
She believed there was elements within Overview and Scrutiny that formed part of good decision-making although the Council were encouraged to move on from replicating functions that existed in the old system. It was mentioned that functions such as Policy Development and Holding to Account should be retained effectively in the new system.
|
|
Dr Karen Ford
|
5.6 |
Dr Karen Ford attended the meeting and gave a verbal submission to the Committee. A written submission was also circulated to the Committee, prior to the meeting.
|
5.7 |
Key points to note from Dr Karen Ford’s verbal submission were-
|
5.8 |
Members of Committee asked questions and the following responses were provided by Dr Ford:-
|
5.9 |
She explained there needed to be criteria for appointing Members to a Committee which would reflect how the public voted in the local elections.
|
5.10 |
Dr Karen Ford believed that public engagement would improve if proportion representation was implemented in the new system. She thought members of the public would feel their vote meant something.
|
|
An Active Citizen
|
5.11 |
Nigel Slack attended the meeting and gave a verbal submission to the Committee. A written submission was also circulated to the Committee, prior to the meeting.
|
5.12 |
Key points to note from Nigel Slack’s verbal submission were-
|
5.13 |
Following Mr Slacks verbal submission, the Committee had no further questions.
|
|
National Expert in Local Governance and Decision Making
|
5.14 |
John Cade from INGOLOV attended the meeting virtually and gave a verbal submission to the Committee.
|
5.15 |
Key points to note from John Cade’s verbal submission were-
|
5.16 |
Members of Committee asked questions and the following responses were provided by Mr Cade:-
|
5.17 |
He believed that Chairs of Committees should also be in effect the ‘Portfolio Holders’ for that area if indeed there were a need for such a term in this system. This would ensure that people had a clear path to someone with understanding of that area.
|
5.18 |
John Cade had seen Councils operate where the Chairs of Committees are from the majority political party. Alternatively, he had seen Councils where the Chairs were politically proportionate. John Cade stated the important thing was to ensure the Chair could command the confidence and support of that Committee.
|
5.19 |
He believed Co-Chairs would be a positive change.
|
5.20 |
It was suggested that the total number of Policy Committees remained within single figures.
|
5.21 |
John Cade referred to Birmingham City Council, where they had Neighbourhood Committees which would frequently update a particular Policy Committee on local issues.
|
5.22 |
It was advised that their system had an arrangement which allowed the Council to reflect on the Committee System’s effectiveness. It was suggested this could be done 6-8 months after the implementation of the system.
|
5.23 |
It was stated the Strategy and Resources Committee should not be a Cabinet under another name as this would be a betrayal of what the Council agreed to move away from through the referendum. Although, there needed to be an Overarching Committee which dealt with key strategic and budgetary decisions instead of these been taken to different Committees. It was suggested the Overarching Committees membership is the Chairs of each Policy Committee and consider a geographical spread of area Members to input on local issues, and that this would not necessarily constitute a ‘cabinet by another name’.
|
5.24 |
John Cade had witnesses other Councils use Urgency Committees for urgent decision making. Although, it was advised that urgent decisions be delegated to an Officer in consultation with the relevant Committee Chair.
|
5.25 |
John Cade hoped that each Councillor would want to have a seat on at least one Policy Committee although was reluctant to make it a requirement. This was because he thought Councillors may wish to spend more time in wards, dealing with local issues.
|
|
An Academic, University of Sheffield
|
5.26 |
Matthew Wood from University of Sheffield attended the meeting virtually and gave a verbal submission to the Committee. A written submission was also circulated to the Committee, prior to the meeting.
|
5.27 |
Key points to note from Matthew Wood’s verbal submission were-
|
5.28 |
Following Matthew Wood’s verbal submission, the Committee had no further questions and thanked him for his submission.
|
|
Chief Executive, Sheffield City Council
|
5.29 |
Kate Joseph, Chief Executive at Sheffield City Council, attended the meeting and gave a verbal submission to the Committee.
|
5.30 |
Key points to note from Kate Joseph’s verbal submission were-
- Be more connected to communities. - Be confident and outward looking. - Support excellent delivery of public services.
|
5.31 |
Members of Committee asked questions and the following responses were provided by Kate Josephs: -
|
5.32 |
She believed it would be effective for each Policy Committee to have ownership of their specific budget for that area of work whilst the Overarching Committee had an overall view.
|
5.33 |
It was stated the Committee shouldn’t be restrained in recommending something they felt needed to be implemented in the new system. Officers would then be able to provide potential costs of those recommendations.
|
5.34 |
Kate Joseph explained that if the Council chose to hold elections all-out every 4 years instead of the current arrangement, then it would be implemented, although this was something the Council needed to consider separately.
|
5.35 |
In was stated that it is the Officers duty to present well evidenced recommendations to Committees without favour, to allow for good discussions and considerations by Members.
|
5.36 |
The Chair thanked all the attendees for attending the inquiry session and for sharing their views on a new Committee System.
|
Supporting documents: