Agenda item

Committee System Structure

Report of the Director of Legal & Governance to follow.

Minutes:

6.1.1

The Committee received a report of the Director of Legal and Governance concerning the committee system structure.

 

6.1.2

The Assistant Director (Governance), Alexander Polak referred to the report. It was mentioned there was 86 recommendations for the Committee to consider and these were split into 13 sections.

 

6.1.3

The Assistant Director (Governance) would aim to summarise each section, if necessary, before Members of the Committee discussed any recommendations they wished to have a debate on. Members could then propose amendments to the recommendations, where necessary, then vote on that amendment and recommendation.

 

6.1.4

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained there were recommendations in italics within the report. These were recommendations that had previously been agreed in Committee.

 

6.1.5

The Committee were informed that the report had been produced in alignment with the framework and design principles, and that these should continuously be kept in mind when amending the recommendations.

 

 

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, PARTICIPATION AND COMMUNICATIONS

 

6.2.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the recommendations in this section outlined how the Council intended to engage with citizens, communities and partners immediately, and how the Council also planned to continuously engage in the future.

 

6.2.2

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 1-13 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.2.3

A Member of the Committee did not believe it was appropriate to only allow public questions / petitions that related to topics on a policy committee agenda. It was stated that questions / petitions on other issues needed to be brought to committees. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the reason for recommendation 4 was to reduce the amount of volume and time spent in committees.

 

6.2.4

In relation to recommendation 4, a Member of the Committee agreed that public should be allowed to present questions / petitions at policy committees that referred to issues separate to the items on the agenda, as that was their opportunity to input on policy.

 

6.2.5

In relation to recommendation 4, it was stated that questions / petitions that related to other topics should be allowed. This could lead to a particular committee wanting to investigate different issues, not currently on their work programme.

 

6.2.6

It was suggested that the total number of signatures required to trigger a petition debate should be included in recommendation 5, as it is not clear whether that detail had been rescinded. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained that if details like this one had not been specified in the report, then it meant that the detail was to remain the same in the new system. Therefore, the threshold still required 5000 signatures to trigger a debate at Council.

 

6.2.7

It was suggested that recommendation 9 be amended, to make it more clear for the public, on how they contact their Councillor through the Council’s webpage. The Assistant Director (Governance) agreed it needed to be clear, although stated there needed to be balance on how many enquires councillors received direct and what issues could be resolved through other services within the Council. Therefore, Councillors would not be overloaded.

 

6.2.8

It was stated that the use of electronic voting and the recording of those votes should be either used in every Policy Committee or none, to keep consistency within meetings. It was added that it needed to be clear whether other committees required recorded votes as well as policy committees.

 

6.2.9

It was mentioned that recording votes by show of hands or verbal agreement, was a quicker way to deal with votes, rather than carrying out a recorded vote each time. It was agreed that further consideration be given to this as part of recommendation 11.

 

6.2.10

A Member of the Committee advised that any future Council policy should embed how it intended to engage with public.

 

6.2.11

It was suggested that each Policy Committee could have an individual tasked with making sure the Committee reached out and engaged with as many citizens and communities as possible. However, an opposing view, that this ought to be all councillors’ responsibility, was also expressed.

 

6.2.12

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sue Alston, seconded by Councillor Sioned-Mair Richards.

 

6.2.13

Removal of ‘(limited to substantive topics on that day’s meeting agenda,)’ from recommendation 4.

 

6.2.14

To add ‘advise petitioners’ in replace of ‘route petitions’ at recommendation 5.

 

6.2.15

To add ‘the decision remains with the petitioner’ to recommendation 5.

 

6.2.16

To add ‘or if not the option to attend another policy committee or full council’ to recommendation 6.

6.2.17

To add ‘and to make it easier to access to information on councillors both online and in other such places’ to recommendation 9.

 

6.2.18

To amend recommendation 11 to read ‘Further consideration be given to options relating to electronic voting and an online record of councillor’s votes’

 

6.2.19

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraphs 6.2.13 to 6.2.18 above were carried.

 

 

 

FULL COUNCIL

 

6.3.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the recommendations in this section were in place so that the function of Full Council will work effectively. Some recommendations had already been discussed and agreed at previous Committees.  It was added that Full Council should not cut across any decision about to be made by a Policy Committee without following an appropriate path.

 

6.3.2

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained there were amendments to recommendations 22, 23 and 24, which had been suggested by officers, for the Committee to consider.

 

6.3.3

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 14-25 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.3.4

A Member of the Committee asked for clarification on recommendation 15. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained that Council agreed a budget and corporate plan on an annual basis, to set out the division of resources and where those resources were intended to go. That constituted the proportion of the budget policy framework, which the policy committees will sit within. Therefore, the purpose of recommendation 15 was to agree for Full Council, to be the place where the policy committee remit is agreed each year.

 

6.3.5

A Member of the Committee asked for clarification on recommendation 18 b. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the intention was to ensure better use of Members’ time in committees.

 

6.3.6

In relation to recommendation 24, it was mentioned that it needed to be clear that Council had the power to rescind a committee’s authority, to investigate specific issues, if an outcome of a notice of motion meant that it would contradict that committees workstreams. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained that he had looked to amend the Council’s constitution, which would limit Full Council’s ability to crosscut with Policy Committees, therefore making it more organised and aligned. The Director of Legal and Governance added that if Full Council needed to make a decision that affected a policy committee’s ability to make a decision, then Full Council would have to agree to rescind delegated authority for the particular committee within that meeting. At the following Full Council meeting, there would be a report that outlined the legal, financial and equalities implications so that Full Council could then make an informed decision on that matter.

 

6.3.7

Concerns were raised around the time it could take for reports to return to Full Council, if the decision was to rescind authority from a policy committee. It was mentioned that this could take up to 2 months, as the new system states that Full Council would meet on alternate months. The Director of Legal and Governance explained if there was an urgent decision needed to be made by a policy committee, that committee could call for an additional meeting. Also, Full Council could be called take an urgent decision if necessary.

 

6.3.8

The Director of Legal of Governance mentioned that Members could turn to officers for advice on notices of motion, prior to the submission date, and that this would be useful if Members knew a decision of a motion could cause significant impact.

 

6.3.9

A Member of the Committee advised that the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee should have the ability to change a policy committees work programme.

 

6.3.10

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sue Alston, seconded by Councillor Peter Garbutt.

 

6.3.11

That further consideration be given to recommendation 18c and 18d.

 

6.3.12

To add ‘advise petitioners’ in replace of ‘route petitions’ at recommendation 19.

 

6.3.13

To add ‘but the decision remains with the petitioner’ to recommendation 19.

 

6.3.14

To add ‘advise questioners’ in replace of ‘route questions’’ at recommendation 20.

 

6.3.15

To add ‘but the decision remains with the questioner’ to recommendation 20.

 

6.3.16

That recommendation 22, 23 and 24 be amended to read ‘Further consideration be given to a system whereby full council can rescind authority from committees, in order to take decisions at full council’

 

6.3.17

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraphs 6.3.11 to 6.3.16 above were carried.

 

 

LEADERSHIP – KEY COUNCILLORS’ ROLES

 

6.4.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained that this section of recommendations was to set out key roles for Councillors with Leadership responsibilities. These included the Leader of the Council, the Lord Mayor and Chairs of Policy Committees.

 

6.4.2

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 26-29 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.4.3

A Member of the Committee raised concerns around the practicality of co-chairing and job sharing the Chair role of policy committees. It was suggested that a review should take place if councillors were to co-chair or job share that role. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained there was already co-chairs and job shares operating within the Council.

 

6.4.4

It was suggested that recommendation 29 defined whether there would be either a job share or co-chairs. Additionally, a maximum of 2 co-chairs.

 

6.4.5

A Member of the Committee believed evidence from the inquiry process gave the Committee knowledge that co-chairs were effective when aligned with cross-directorships. Sheffield City Council was to align the policy committees with a single directorship, therefore asked whether co-chairs would be necessary, or the current chair/vice chair model would be as equally effective. Another Member of the Committee mentioned that Brighton & Hove Council operated with co-chairs, and they had single directorships. That Council believed it was effective having co-chairs for large directorships, so that each chair could pick cover different areas, with it not being overbearing. It was added that Brighton & Hove Council did have Vice-Chairs although their role was not necessarily needed, as the work was divided across the co-chairs.

 

6.4.6

It was suggested that the Lord Mayor should be able to vote on decisions at Full Council. Rather than just having the casting vote, as this may not be needed throughout the term of Lord Mayor.

 

6.4.7

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sue Alston, seconded by Councillor Dawn Dale.

 

6.4.8

To amend recommendation 29 to read ‘The facility for Councillors to either job-share a Chair role or to co-chair a committee, with clarity about expectations and allowances including:

  1. there should not be both a job share and co-chair on any one committee.
  2.  That the role of vice chair on a committee, where the chairs’ role is divided as above, needs to be clarified, or the committee may decide there’s no need for a job share role. 
  3. A maximum of 2 co-chairs in any given committee.
  4. There should be a full review of this arrangement as part of the ongoing review process after an such role has occurred for the first time.’

 

6.4.9

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraph 6.4.8 above were carried.

 

 

INDIVIDUAL COUNCILLORS

 

6.5.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained that the new system would potentially increase Councillor workload, therefore this section of recommendation set out provisions for councillors, with the intention to mitigate this.

 

6.5.2

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 30-36 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.5.3

In relation to recommendation 31 (Member development), it was suggested this was member-led.

 

6.5.4

The Director of Legal and Governance explained that she met with group Whips, to discuss member development, in addition, the Audit & Standards Committee currently reviewed member development as part of their terms of reference around the Code of Conduct. The combination of the two guided the Council’s current member development. It was mentioned that officer support to Member development had previously been reduced due to the Council’s budgetary position, although recently, more resource had been put in place within Democratic Services to facilitate this.

 

6.5.5

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sue Alston, seconded by Councillor Peter Garbutt.

 

6.5.6

To add ‘Member-led’ to recommendation 30.

 

6.5.7

To remove ‘full time’ from recommendation 32.

 

6.5.8

To add ‘as part of the review of the scheme’ to recommendation 32.

 

6.5.9

To replace ‘member questions (casework)’ with ‘member’s casework’ in recommendation 35.

 

6.5.10

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraphs 6.5.6 to 6.5.9 above were carried.

 

 

POLICY COMMITTEES

 

6.6.1

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 37-52 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.6.2

It was suggested that each policy committee had a member responsible for equalities, diversity and inclusion, and biodiversity and climate change. The Director of Legal and Governance advised that future reports would aim to be written in a way that covers important aspects like these. Although, it was recommended that there not be an individual be responsible for this.

 

6.6.3

It was asked whether recommendation 40 needed to be amended to reflect that certain sub-committees may need to remain, rather than being time limited. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the recommendation stated that sub-committees, at a minimum, will be reviewed at the Council’s annual meeting. Therefore, sub-committees may remain, if seen as still necessary at Council’s annual meeting.

 

6.6.4

It was suggested that further consideration be given to recommendation 45. It was added that the Committee needed to consider other responsibilities and duties that some Councillors had, besides been an elected member, when agreeing the timings and scheduling for committees.

 

6.6.5

The Assistant Director (Governance) confirmed that Democratic Services were currently scheduling a timetable for committee meetings, for the consideration of Members.

 

6.6.6

A Member of the Committee suggested to include to separate meetings times to recommendation 45. To give each committee the option of which they would prefer to meet.

 

6.6.7

In relation to recommendation 50, a Member did not believe it was appropriate to agree a certain time period in which decisions can be overturned. Alternatively, decisions should stand unless clear evidence suggested otherwise.

 

6.6.8

It was raised that recommendation 52 needed to be amended, to align with previous amendments around public questions/petitions. Therefore, a Member suggested removing all wording within the brackets.

 

6.6.9

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sue Alston, seconded by Councillor Sioned Mair Richards.

 

6.6.10

To re-word recommendation 45 e to read ‘Further consideration be given to the timing and scheduling of all committee meetings on an annual basis’

 

6.6.11

To add ‘for councillors’ to recommendation 47.

 

6.6.12

To add ‘Further consideration be given to’ to recommendation 50.

 

6.6.13

To remove ‘(which must relate to substantive agenda items on that day’s agenda)’ from recommendation 52.

 

6.6.14

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraphs 6.6.10 to 6.6.13 above were carried.

 

 

STRATEGY AND RESOURCES POLICY COMMITTEE (AND FINANCE SUB-COMMITTEE)

 

6.7.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the recommendations in this section outlined some important aspects around the strategy and Resources Policy Committee.

 

6.7.2

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 53-62 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.7.3

In relation to recommendation 54, a Member of the Committee asked what the process would be if a Member was to go on long-term sickness as the recommendation stated that no substitutes can attend for members of that committee. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained that the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee would comprise the Chairs of each policy committees, plus others for political proportionality. Therefore, if a Member was to be away for a long period of time, the policy committee would need to appoint someone as chair in their absence, which then gave them a seat on the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee. If a member of the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee, who was not a chair of a policy committee was to be away for a long period of time, the appropriate political group could re-nominate a member of their group onto the committee.

 

6.7.4

The Assistant Director (Governance) raised how it was important to ensure the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee stayed politically proportionate. If a Member of that committee was to send a substitute, who was not from the same political party, then it would unbalance the proportionality. Therefore, it was recommended that no substitutes can attend for members of that committee.

 

6.7.5

A Member of the Committee mentioned there was a duplication of work around the conducting of regular monitoring of the revenue and capital budget, as recommendation 62 stated that both the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee and Finance Sub-Committee, would monitor this. The Assistant Director (Governance) stated that both committees would meet on alternate months. Therefore, monitoring this area would be checked each month, although it was agreed it needed to be clear that no overlap between the committees occurred.

 

6.7.6

After the discussion and debate, no amendments were proposed to recommendations 53 to 62.

 

 

URGENT DECISIONS

 

6.8.1

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 63-65 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.8.2

It was raised that there needed to be clear understanding on what classified as urgent and whether the Chair of Strategy and Resources Policy Committee should be able to take these decisions. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained that no individual councillor can take an urgent decision. If an urgent decision was unable to go to a committee, it would go to an officer for a decision.

 

6.8.3

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sioned Mair Richards, seconded by Councillor Sue Alston.

 

6.8.4

To replace ‘at least an attempt to consult with the Chair first’ with ‘wherever practically possible consultation with the Chair. In the absence of the Chair, consultation with the Vice Chair. In the absence of the Vice Chair, consultation the Leader of the Council’ at recommendation 64a

.

6.8.5

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraph 6.8.4 above were carried.

 

 

LOCAL AREA COMMITTEES

 

6.9.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the Committee had already agreed the principle of how Local Area Committees operated and these recommendations do not intend to change their delegated authority, but to agree some specific functionality aspects within the Committees.

 

6.9.2

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 66-68 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.9.3

In relation to recommendation 68, a Member of the Committee asked whether it would be more appropriate for the Chair of the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee to be consulted, when the Monitoring officer is reviewing referrals from one committee to another. The Assistant Director (Governance) stated that these referrals could occur often. Therefore, it would be more efficient for the Monitoring Officer to take a decision, and then report back to the committee once it had been referred.

 

6.9.4

It was suggested that recommendation 68 be amended, so it was clear that the Chair of the referring committee would be notified when any referral pathway had changed.

 

6.9.5

It was suggested that Local Area Committees were monitored by the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee, rather than the policy committee with responsibility for communities. It was mentioned that Local Area Committees and Policy Committees were equals within the new system therefore a committee with more authority should have the responsibility for monitoring the Local Area Committees.

 

6.9.6

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sioned Mair Richards, seconded by Councillor Sue Alston.

 

6.9.7

To amend recommendation 67 to read ‘The Strategy & Resources Policy Committee will have a special role in monitoring what is referred to all other committees by Local Area Committees and looking for patterns, in liaison with the LAC chairs. The policy committee with responsibilities for communities will have a role to oversee the Communities/Localism strategy within which the LACs are operating’

 

6.9.8

To add ‘and the LAC Chair to be notified where any referral pathway is changed’ to recommendation 68.

 

6.9.9

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraphs 6.9.7 to 6.9.8 above were carried.

 

 

SCRUTINY (INCLUDING STATUTORY SCRUTINY)

 

6.10.1

The Assistant Director (governance) explained the term ‘scrutiny’ commonly referred to the Cabinet and Leader model which the Council would be moving away from. Although there would not be an Overview and Scrutiny Committee, there needed to be appropriate mechanisms for holding to account and other such statutory scrutiny functions within the new system.

 

6.10.2

It was added that the recommendation from Officers was not to implement a Call-in function within the new system. This was based on evidence received from the inquiry process, in which other Local Authorities explained it was not efficient for councillors to call-in decisions made by a committee as it was believed that decisions needed to stand to ensure certainty.

 

6.10.3

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 69-73 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.10.4

A Member of the Committee believed the recommendations did not consider political differences. Therefore, it was suggested that a minority report should be able to be presented at either Full Council or the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee, to decide whether a decision that had been made, needed to be looked into further. Another Member of the Committee stated that debates within committees should be the place where councillor’s thoughts were considered, and the scrutiny of decisions took place.

 

6.10.5

It was suggested there needed to be a mechanism that allowed for the public and stakeholders to call-in decisions made by the Council. This would also ensure the Council had considered them, at different points in the whole process. Another Member stated there would be opportunities for Stakeholders to attend policy committees and share their thoughts before a decision was made.

 

6.10.6

After the discussion and debate, no amendments were proposed to recommendations 69 to 73.

 

 

OTHER COMMITTEES

 

6.11.1

No discussion or amendments were proposed to recommendations 74-75.

 

 

SCHEMES OF DELEGATION

 

6.12.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) introduced this section and suggested that given the continued rises in property prices and the need to be efficient with committee time, a higher threshold might be more appropriate in recommendation 79, such as £300k or £500k.

 

6.12.2

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 76-82 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.12.3

A Member of the Committee believed the figure of 250k in recommendation 79 concerning decisions about property was too high. It was suggested that this figure be amended to 150k. Another Member thought £150k may lead to too much business for the committee to consider on a regular basis. The Director of Legal and Governance suggested this be monitored and reviewed within the 6-month review process.

 

6.12.4

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Mohammed Mahroof, seconded by Councillor Mark Jones.

 

6.12.5

To replace ‘250k’ with ‘150k’ in recommendation 79.

 

6.12.6

To add ‘Ongoing review of this threshold to be within the Governance Committee’s terms of reference’ to recommendation 79.

 

6.12.7

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraphs 6.12.5 to 6.12.7 above were carried.

 

 

STAFFING, RELATIONSHIPS AND CASEWORK

 

6.13.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained there were no recommendations in this section as these covered operational aspects on how committees would be supported. Although this section had no recommendations, it was still important for the Committee have sight of this information and consider it, as necessary.

 

6.13.2

Members of the Committee did not further discuss this section of the report.

 

 

ONGOING REVIEWS OF GOVERNANCE

 

6.14.1

The Assistant Director (Governance) explained this section of the report was to inform the Committee of how it was intended to review the governance arrangements of the Council in the future.

 

6.14.2

Members of the Committee discussed recommendations 83-86 and the key points to note were: -

 

6.14.3

It was highlighted that the current Governance Committee is formed of Chairs and Vice chairs of transitional committees, which would mirror the membership of Strategy ad Resources Policy Committee. Therefore, would the Committee need to make it clear the membership of the Governance Committee, needed to be different to the membership of the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained there were no constraints for which councillors can be nominated to have a seat on the Governance Committee.

 

6.14.4

It was suggested that at least 1 councillor who does not have a seat on any policy committee had a seat on the Governance Committee, for independent perspectives. The Assistant Director (Governance) suggested these perspectives are considered when nominating councillors onto committees.

 

6.14.5

A Member of the Committee stated that it needed to be clear, that members of the public were included in the review process, within the Governance Committee. It was added that public should also be appointed onto the Governance Committee and have the authority to vote on decisions. The Assistant Director (Governance) explained the Committee could co-opt an individual, with expertise in a certain area, onto the committee although they would not have voting authority. The Committee were advised to take caution if they decided to do this, to ensure the Council was not accused of political bias when appointing a co-opted member.

 

6.14.6

A Member of the Committee thought it would be beneficial for the current membership of the Governance Committee to remain the same, at least until the 6-month review was complete.

 

6.14.7

In relation to recommendation 84, The Head of Policy and Partnerships, Laurie Brennan, suggested that partners be included in the list of who the Governance Committee committed to directly engage and participate with in their ongoing consideration of the health of Sheffield’s democratic environment.

 

6.14.8

A Member of the Committee advised that there could be recommendations for the Committee to consider, following the report of the Race Equality Commission. The Member suggested a recommendation was included to reflect that the Committee would take into consideration, the recommendations of the Race Equality Commission. The Director of Legal and Governance mentioned there was risk of including specific names into the recommendations, as this could look like the Council was not taking other groups into account. The Member was content that recommendation 86a agreed to take account of any changes to the local and national context.

 

6.14.9

A Member of the Committee raised whether guidance around decisions been taken during the pre-election period needed to be included in the standing orders. The Director of Legal and Governance reassured Members on the position around decisions through the election period. It was added there is no restrictions for decision-making through the election period, the restrictions apply to the publication linked to decisions.

 

6.14.10

The Director of Legal and Governance confirmed the legislation allowed for the Leader of the Council to still take decisions, up until the annual meeting of the Council.

 

6.14.11

After the discussion and debate, the following amendments were proposed by Councillor Sue Alston, seconded by Councillor Peter Garbutt.

 

6.14.12

To add ‘Governance’ to recommendation 83.

 

6.14.13

To add ‘and partners’ to recommendation 84.

 

6.14.14

On being put to the vote, the amendments at paragraphs 6.14.12 to 6.14.13 above were carried.

 

6.15.1

RESOLVED: That (1) the elements of a committee system of governance set out in this report, including 85 recommendations as amended and Appendix 1, be agreed to inform the detailed drafting of the Constitution as follows;

 

  1. Continue to work with the public, stakeholders and community groups to develop our approach to public participation and engagement over the coming months ahead of May 2022.
  2. Create the framework, co-designed with communities in Sheffield, to transform our longer-term approach to involvement and empowerment
  3. Continue to develop Local Area Committees’ role as key conduits with local places and their communities, encouraging both local engagement on strategic matters and strategic escalation or amplification of local issues of concern.
  4. Public Question / petition opportunities at all new Policy Committees
  5. Petition scheme to be formalised into the Constitution and reviewed to advise petitioners as to the appropriate decision-making body in the first instance (see ‘Full Council). In some but not all cases this will continue to be Full Council – in others it will be a Committee but the decision remains with the petitioner
  6. Improved signposting to a single inbox for people wishing to ask questions or present petitions to members, with a triage system to advise people as to whether their topic is on the work programme for any Policy Committee and if so providing an option to put them on the appropriate agenda or if not the option to attend another policy committee or full council
  7. Review use and application of digital engagement tools in line with our developing involvement ambitions
  8. Development and agreement of a medium to long term, public participation and engagement strategy
  9. Improved provision of information online about democratic processes at Sheffield City Council and how to learn more or get involved and to make it easier to access to information about councillors both online and in other places
  10. Commitment to involvement of the public and stakeholders in the Governance Committee’s six-month review of the new committee system
  11. Further consideration be given to options relating to electronic voting and an online record of councillor’s votes
  12. A toolkit to be developed for each committee to use when considering its ‘menu of options’ for ensuring the voice of the public has been central to their policy development work. For the most appropriate mechanism to be employed depending on the circumstances. This builds on the experiences of Scrutiny Committees and latterly the Transitional Committees and, subject to further consideration including the ongoing work with Involve, could include (but would not be limited to):
    1. Public calls for evidence
    2. ‘Hackathon’ style issue-focused workshops led by committees
    3. Creative use of online engagement channels#
    4. Working with VCF networks (eg including the Sheffield Equality Partnership) to seek views of communities
    5. Co-design events on specific challenges or to support policy development
    6. Citizens assembly style activities
    7. Stakeholder reference groups (standing or one-off)
    8. Committee / small group visits to services
    9. Formal and informal discussion groups
    10. Facilitated communities of interest around each committee (eg a mailing list of self-identified stakeholders and interested parties with regular information about forthcoming decisions and requests for contributions or volunteers for temporary co-option)
    11. Facility for medium-term or issue-by-issue co-option from outside the Council onto Committees or Task and Finish Groups
  13. Chairs of Policy Committees to act as the primary spokesperson on behalf of the Council for the subject area of the Committees they chair (see ‘Leadership’). Group spokespersons on each committee may be expected to comment on behalf of their Groups but not the committee as a whole.
  14. Eight meetings a year – six plus a budget council and an AGM. No ‘scrutiny council’.
  15. Agreement of the Council’s Corporate Plans and associated annual plans to be reserved to Full Council as a key part of the Council’s Policy Framework – these will in effect set out the delivery objectives for each committee during the periods concerned.
  16. By agreeing the terms of reference of the various Policy Committees and any sub-committees, Full Council defines the policy boundaries within which each committee has authority to take decisions on behalf of the Authority in pursuit of their objectives as per the Corporate Plans.
  17. By agreeing its annual budget Full Council defines the budgetary envelope within which each committee has authority to take decisions on behalf of the Authority in pursuit of their objectives as per the Corporate Plans.
  18. Council Procedure rules to be updated, including the following:
  1. ‘Questions to Cabinet Members’ to become ‘Questions to Chairs’ of any committee (or to councillor nominees on outside bodies / joint cttees, including the Mayoral Combined Authority).
  2. No exclusively ‘to note’ items.
  3. Further consideration be given to: Clearer voting practices (no agreement by ‘common assent’, Chairs to clearly narrate For/Against/Abstentions and the outcome, and to request a show of hands where electronic voting is not available)
  4. Further consideration be given to: Where facilities for electronic voting / electronic recording of votes are available, this system will be used and the vote will be recorded and published online (see ‘Public Engagement’) this not to be included in vote. (was there something here)
  1. Petition scheme to be formalised into the Constitution and reviewed to advise petitioners as to the appropriate decision-making body in the first instance (see ‘Public Engagement’). In some but not all cases this will continue to be Full Council – in others it will be a Committee but the decisions remain with the petitioner.
  2. Public Questions rules to be reviewed to advise questioners about the appropriate decision-making body in the first instance (see ‘Public Engagement’ and ‘policy Committees’). In some but not all cases this will continue to be Full Council – in others it will be a Committee but the decision remains with the questioner.
  3. The current time limit to be carried over for the proportion of a public meeting used for petitions / questions from the public.
  4. Further consideration be given to a system whereby full council can rescind authority from committees, in order to take decisions at full council. (A motion for Council brought under ‘notice of motions’ may propose that a report be brought to Council with a recommendation to rescind authority from a committee for a particular decision found on that Committee’s work programme (ie such that the decision must then be taken by Full Council rather than by a committee). No valid motion under ‘notice of motions’ can itself move to rescind such authority (see ‘Scrutiny’))
  5. Further consideration be given to a system whereby full council can rescind authority from committees, in order to take decisions at full council. (Without reference to the above process, a report recommending the rescinding of authority from a committee to Full Council may be referred to Council by that committee or by Strategy and Resources Policy Committee (by simple majority) in advance of such decision appearing substantively on the relevant committee’s own agenda. (see ‘Scrutiny’))
  6. Further consideration be given to a system whereby full council can rescind authority from committees, in order to take decisions at full council. (Outside of the processes above, while Committees should of course have reference to any Council resolution arising from a motion brought under ‘notice of motions’ which pertains to a committee decision, a motion to Council under ‘notice of motions’ will not be valid if it would have the effect of firmly binding the hands of a committee on a matter which falls within a committee’s delegated authority, to the extent that members of that Committee would become predetermined.)
  7. Committees (with the exception of Strategy and Resources Committee) may not refer to Full Council a matter which is properly within the remit of another Committee.
  8. A role (and role profile’) for the Leader in the constitution, to include:
  1. Primary spokesperson for the Council and its administration,
  2. Advocate for the city on a local, regional and national stage
  3. Representative of the Council in regional and national networks and with Central Government
  4. Chairing the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee
  5. a personal role with regard to:

                                               i.     Core City status and associated meetings/bodies

                                              ii.     The Mayoral Combined Authority

  1. A key role chairing various informal Member/officer forums
  1. A role profile for Policy Committee Chairs in the constitution, to include:
  1. Primary officer point of contact with regard to the committee’s ongoing business, formulation of a draft work programme for the committee’s consideration, and for advice about engagement with the committee
  2. Primary spokesperson for the committee they chair (see ‘Public Engagement and Comms’)
  3. In the case of the Chair of the Children’s Services Policy Committee, to be the Statutory Lead Member for Children’s Services
  4. To convene and chair regular pre-agenda and pre-meeting briefings with all the Group Spokespersons from their committee
  1. Committees to appoint their own Chairs on an annual basis as per current practice.
  2. The facility for Councillors to either job-share a Chair role or to co-chair a committee, with clarity about expectations and allowances including:
    1. there should not be both a job share and co-chair on any one committee.
    2.  That the role of vice chair on a committee, where the chairs’ role is divided as above, needs to be clarified, or the committee may decide there’s no need for a job share role. 
    3. A maximum of 2 co-chairs in any given committee.
    4. There should be a full review of this arrangement as part of the ongoing review process after an such role has occurred for the first time.
  3. Launch of modern.gov app to support digital ways of working
  4. Member-led refresh of Member Development Strategy and annual Member Development and Induction Plan
  1. To include enhanced training on eg finance, audit, safeguarding responsibilities for the wider group of members involved in decisions of this sort
  2. To include specific training on working effectively within a committee system, including content on ‘how to disagree effectively’ or the art of effective negotiation and compromise within committee settings
  1. Independent Remuneration Panel to consider the strength of the Scheme of Allowance’s support for parents, carers and people in work as part of the review of the scheme
  2. Ongoing consideration of options for use of hybrid and remote meeting options, subject to the legislative context
  3. Implementation of improved Member newsletter
  4. Implementation of improved arrangements for members’ casework
  5. Creation of job-share option for Chairing roles (see ‘Leadership – Key Councillors’ Roles)
  6. Seven themed Policy Committees which will be closely aligned to the functions of the Council;
  7. A Strategy & Resources Policy Committee including all Policy Committee Chairs within its membership, with cross-cutting responsibility for the policy and budgetary framework, chaired by the Leader of the Council;
  8. A programme of six meetings of each Policy Committee per year
  9. Provision for Full Council but not individual Committees to agree the addition of sub-committees to this structure. When sub-committees are agreed they will be time limited or at minimum will be reviewed annually at the AGM.
  10. Limits (to be defined) on the number and frequency of Task and Finish Groups carrying out detailed pre-decision scrutiny (policy development) on behalf of Policy Committees;
  11. Full Council to agree the size of Policy Committees at its AGM, based on best fit to proportionality. With the exception of Strategy and Resources Policy Committee, this must be within the parameters of a committee size of between 8 and 11 members.
  12. A standing Finance Sub-Committee, reporting to the Strategy & Resources Committee (Chair and membership not constrained)
  13. An annual exercise for Strategy and Resources Committee to develop an annual work plan with reference to the Corporate Plan and in consultation with all the other Policy Committees.
  1. This process to also be a work programming exercise.
  2. Each committee to keep its work programme under review at each meeting.
  3. Strategy and Resources Committee to consider the combined Policy Committee Work Programme every other meeting to ensure corporate objectives are being achieved.
  4. Space within this item to consider references from other committees – issues raised by eg LACs
  1. Guillotine clause for all Policy Committee meetings (2 hrs + 30 mins)
  1. Further consideration be given to the timing and scheduling of all committee meetings on an annual basis
  1. Extraordinary meetings to need approval of the Monitoring Officer
  2. A corporate approach to the provision and use of business intelligence data and other regular, corporate items for councillors (corporate plan, finance etc)
  3. Each Group on a committee to nominate a ‘spokesperson’ for their Group on that committee.
  4. A mandated system of briefings for Chair/Vice Chair and Group Spokespersons. For each meeting of the committee there will be a:
  1. Pre-agenda briefing to discuss and agree agenda items and approach to items (and to briefings about items). Looking ahead at the committee’s forward plan. Opportunity for all spokespersons to relay early information to their own Groups.
  2. Pre-meeting briefing to discuss published papers on the agenda and the process for the meeting itself. Spokespersons to brief their own Groups as necessary to ensure informed and organised discussions in committee.
  1. Further consideration be given to the option of ensuring that decisions cannot be overturned via a normal decision process within a certain period, to support a degree of stability.
  2. Policy Committees to have responsibility for monitoring the performance of services. Strategy and Resources Committee to have responsibility for considering the overall performance of the Authority as well as the performance of individual Policy Committees eg with regard to delivery against the Corporate Plan (see Strategy and Resources Policy Committee).
  3. Time-limited space for public questions and petitions on every Policy Committee agenda
  4. A Strategy & Resources Policy Committee including all Policy Committee Chairs within its membership, with overarching responsibility for the policy and budgetary framework, is chaired by the Leader of the Council;
  5. No substitutes can attend for members of this committee
  6. A standing Finance Sub-Committee, reporting to the Strategy & Resources Committee;
  7. Ability for scheduled Strategy & Resources Committee meetings to take urgent decisions for the other Policy Committees but only in extremis - if the relevant committee’s Urgency Sub-Committee has been unable to meet in an appropriate timeframe (see ‘urgent decisions’);
  8. Strategy and Resources Committee to have responsibility for considering the overall performance of the Authority as well as the performance of individual Policy Committees eg with regard to delivery against the Corporate Plan. In instances where there is a serious performance concern, they have the ability to refer this concern to Full Council for consideration (see ‘Scrutiny’).
  9. Any issue which is wider than any one of the Policy Committee’s remits (budget or policy) is within the remit of the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee..
  10. Any issue identified as being of significant strategic importance or financial risk to the organisation is considered to be by its nature cross-cutting and therefore within the remit of the Strategy and Resources Policy Committee
  11. In the case of any issue falling within the remit of S&R as above, this committee may opt to either take the decision itself or to dictate which individual Policy Committee will take the lead for the issue by ensuring it gets the necessary one-off delegation to do so.
  12. Finance Sub-Committee has within its remit:
  1. Strategic financial overview
  2. Property decisions
  3. Accountable Body decisions
  4. Corporate Revenue & Capital monitoring
  1. Strategy and Resources Policy Committee, alongside the Finance Sub-Committee, to conduct regular revenue and capital budget monitoring.
  2. Urgency sub-committee for each policy Committee including S&R
    1. Quorum of 3 members, which must include Chair or Vice Chair.
    2. All parent committee’s members and their named substitutes (where applicable) may act as substitute members of an urgency sub-cttee
  3. Clear criteria for different degrees of urgency (including ‘emergency’) to be defined in the constitution along with processes and procedures applicable to each
    1. Including officers taking urgent decisions as last resort – will require wherever practically possible: consultation with the Chair. In the absence of the Chair, consultation with the Vice Chair. In the absence of the Vice Chair, consultation the Leader of the Council and reporting back to committee
    2. Examples of different scales of urgency might be:

                                               i.     Too urgent to wait until next scheduled meeting of Committee

                                              ii.     Too urgent to wait until an extraordinary meeting of an urgency sub-committee

  1. Ability for scheduled Strategy & Resources Committee meetings to take urgent decisions for the other Policy Committees but only in extremis - if the relevant committee’s Urgency Sub-Committee has been unable to meet in an appropriate timeframe.
  2. Seven Local Area Committees with a mechanism (via work programme standing items on each Policy Committee’s agenda, giving committees the opportunity to note the referral and to plan the matter more substantially into their work programme if they wish) to allow for referrals between them and Policy Committees as necessary and regular informal meetings of local area committee chairs to ensure effective coordination;
  3. The Strategy & Resources Policy Committee will have a special role in monitoring what is referred to all other committees by Local Area Committees and looking for patterns, in liaison with the LAC chairs. The policy committee with responsibilities for communities will have a role to oversee the Communities/Localism strategy within which the LACs are operating.
  4. Note that the Monitoring Officer will be responsible for the review of all referrals to ensure they are going to the appropriate body in the first instance and the Chair of the referring committee to be notified where any referral pathway is changed.
  5. No separate scrutiny committee;
  6. Statutory Scrutiny functions to be written into the Terms of Reference of the appropriate Policy Committees
  1. Eg Health Scrutiny as part of the Adult Health and Social Care Policy Committee remit or as a standing sub committee
  1. No mechanism which allows for committees to overturn legitimate committee decisions once they have been made
  2. A strong mechanism by which Strategy and Resources Committee or Full Council can recommend to Council in advance of a decision being made that Full Council rescind that Committee’s delegated authority with regard to a specific decision on their Work Programme.
  1. A motion for Council brought under ‘notice of motions’ may propose that a report be brought to Council with a recommendation to rescind authority from a committee for a particular decision found on that Committee’s work programme (ie such that the decision must then be taken by Full Council rather than by a committee). No valid motion under ‘notice of motions’ can itself move to rescind such authority (see ‘Full Council’)
  2. Without reference to the above process, a report recommending the rescinding of authority from a committee to Full Council may be referred to Council by that committee or by Strategy and Resources Policy Committee (by simple majority) in advance of such decision appearing substantively on the relevant committee’s own agenda. (see ‘Full Council’)
  1. Strategy and Resources Policy Committee will have a role to hold the other Policy Committees to account on their delivery against the Corporate Plan. In instances where there is a serious performance concern, they have the ability to refer this concern to Full Council for consideration (see ‘Strategy and Resources Policy Committee’)
  2. No substantive changes to the committees referred to as Other Committees in the Governance Framework
  3. Various partnership bodies etc will need to have members nominated where previously the Cabinet Member (Co-Operative Executive Member) would have gone. In general it is assumed that the relevant Chair(s) or Vice Chairs of Policy Committees will be nominated by Full Council instead.
  4. The current, standard approach to continue, whereby Councillors take any decision explicitly reserved to Full Council or a Committee, except in specifically defined urgent or emergency circumstances.
  5. All levels of decision currently identified as Individual Executive Member decisions will be taken by a committee unless good reasons are proposed and accepted as to why it is more appropriate for the type of decision to be taken by an officer
  6. Procurement and contracting decisions are taken by officers once a committee has agreed the commission or purchasing decision and the budget on any given requirement
  7. All property related decisions of a value of £150k or more shall be reserved to the Strategy & Resources Policy Committee.
    1. Ongoing review of this threshold to be within the Governance Committee’s terms of reference
  8. A standing sub-committee of the Strategy & Resources Committee be established to deal with the Council’s Charitable Trusts
  9. All Capital allocations and monitoring to be reserved to the Strategy & Resources Committee or its Finance Sub Committee
  10. All bids for grants to be reserved to the finance sub-committee to ensure financial commitments are considered when applying for and accepting grants
  11. The Governance Committee should have named responsibility for, amongst other things, ongoing review and maintenance of the constitution and the governance system it describes.
  12. The Governance Committee’s Terms of Reference should specify their commitment to direct engagement and participation of the public and stakeholders and partners in their ongoing consideration of the health of Sheffield’s democratic environment.
  13. A standalone Governance Committee will continue to hold this responsibility in 2022/23.
  14. The Governance Committee shall conduct a review of the effectiveness of the new system, commencing six months after implementation (November 2022) with a view to Full Council implementing any necessary changes at its AGM in May 2023. This review will:
  1. Take account of any changes to the local and national context
  2. Include the previously agreed ‘strategic aims’ and ‘design principles’ in its assessment criteria
  3. Actively seek and use feedback from residents, stakeholders, councillors, officers and partners to inform its judgements against those criteria

 

 

(2) That the Governance Committee conduct a review of the new governance system, commencing six months after implementation (November 2022) with a view to Full Council implementing any necessary changes at its AGM in May 2023. This review will:

  1. Use the previously agreed ‘strategic aims’ and ‘design principles’ as its success criteria
  2. Actively seek and use feedback from residents, stakeholders, councillors and officers to inform its assessment against those criteria
  3. Take account of any changes to the local and national context

 

 

Supporting documents: