RESOLVED:

That Councillor S F Male be elected Chairman of the Advisory Group for the 2009/10 Council year.

(To receive the Notes of the meeting of the Constitution and Governance Working Group held on 14 January 2009 – enclosed).

RESOLVED:

The notes of the previous meeting held on 14 January 2009 were confirmed as a correct record.

(To consider draft terms of reference of the Advisory Group – enclosed).

The Advisory Group in noting its draft Terms of Reference agreed the following changes:

• 1(a)     The insertion of ‘democratic’  as follows:

To ensure that it assists in the delivery of efficient, transparent, accountable and democratic decision making

• To consider the outcomes of the constitution to ensure the delivery of an efficient Council.

(To consider proposed amendments to Parts D1 and D2 of the Council’s Constitution to accommodate the Councillor Call for Action Guidance, the Crime and Disorder Regulations and a change of name of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Panel.

Report of the Overview and Scrutiny Manager enclosed)

The Advisory Group considered a report from the Overview & Scrutiny Manager proposing amendments to the Constitution to accommodate Councillor Call for Action Guidance, Crime & Disorder Regulations and a change of name of the Overview & Scrutiny Management Panel.

Members discussed the guidance relating to the Councillor Call for Action that had arisen out of the Local Government & Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 which introduced a mechanism whereby local ward Members could raise issues of significant community concern with a relevant overview & scrutiny committee. The regulations enacting this mechanism came into force on 1 April 2009 and the Constitutional changes outlined in Appendices A & B to the report reflected best practice guidelines. 

The Advisory Group then considered the Crime and Disorder Regulations.  Members were advised that the Police & Justice Act 2006 provided similar overview & scrutiny powers to those contained within the Local Government & Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. Regulations enacting those powers came into force on 30 April 2009 and, whilst the Council’s Constitution already took them into account,  a specific change was required relating to the need for crime & disorder partners to respond within 28 days to a report or recommendation made by the relevant overview & scrutiny committee.

Members were advised that the proposed change of name of the Overview & Scrutiny Management Panel to Overview & Scrutiny Co-Ordination Panel had arisen out of a Member training event entitled ‘Getting the most from Scrutiny’.  It was noted that the suggestion was discussed at the first meeting of the OSMP were there was unanimous agreement to the change of name.

The Advisory Group in considering the proposed changes suggested a number of modifications to the guidance and requested the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Manager to undertake the necessary amendments before submission to Council for approval.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

1.         That the Constitutional changes outlined in Appendices A and B,          as amended and attached as an appendix to the minutes, to    accommodate Government Guidance pertaining to the Councillor    Call for Action and the Crime & Disorder Regulations, be approved.

2.         That all references to the “Overview & Scrutiny Management      Panel” contained within the Council’s Constitution be amended to            read the “Overview & Scrutiny Co-ordination Panel”.

(To consider a request from the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Development Management Committee for the Advisory Group:-

(a)    to review the current arrangement for the Committee to meet twice a month at alternative venues and;

(b)    to investigate whether powers could be delegated to officers to deal with applications submitted on behalf of the Council or schools)

Report of the Assistant Director, Development Management to follow)

The Advisory Group considered a report from the Head of Development Management seeking an amendment to the terms of reference of the Development Management Committee (Part E2 Page 1) and the Scheme of Delegation with regards to the handling of Regulation 3 and Regulation 4 planning applications.

Members were advised that since 1 April 2009 the Council’s Development Management Committee had been meeting twice a month, alternating meetings between Priory House and Dunstable.  

The Advisory Group discussed the proposal to move to single venue, three weekly meetings and considered the argument that such a move would balance the achievement of performance targets and reduce the administrative burden of preparing for a Committee every 2 weeks. It was noted that in order to meet nationally set performance targets the meetings consistently contained applications from both the North and South teams and evidence to date suggested that the public will attend either venue.

The Advisory Group whilst recognising the reasons for moving to single venue, 3 weekly meetings agreed that a decision should be deferred to the next meeting to enable the Development Management Committee to be consulted on the proposals.  It was further agreed that a communication should be put out to all members inviting comments.

Members then considered the proposal relating to Regulation 3 and 4 applications.  Regulation 3 applications being applications for planning permission by the Authority to develop any land of the authority either solely or jointly with another party.  Regulation 4 applications being applications for planning permission to develop land of the authority where they do not intend to develop the land themselves or jointly with any person. 

The Advisory Group in discussing the proposal noted that the constitution was currently unclear on these two types of regulations and for this reason agreed that the handling of these two regulations should be changed as follows:

·        The scheme of delegation for Regulation 3 applications be amended to allow delegation to officers unless an objection is received to the proposed development.  Regulation 4 applications are specifically excluded from the delegations and have to be determined by the Committee.

The recommendation to be put to Council was agreed as:

·        Paragraph 4.3.93 of Part H3 of the Constitution remains as drafted but with an additional exception being created to exclude Regulation 3 applications where an objection has been received.

·        Paragraph 4.3.93.5 of Part H3 of the Constitution be amended to concern itself solely with Regulation 4 applications which would be reported to, and determined by, Committee. 

The suggested wording for this amendment was agreed as follows:-

Paragraph 4.3.93.5           The application is made on land owned by the Authority for development which the Authority does not intend to develop either themselves or jointly with any person in accordance with Regulation 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General) Regulations 1992.

NOTE:  As these changes relate to regulatory functions of the Council it will be necessary to seek the approval of the Development Management Committee

RESOLVED:

1.                  That consideration of the proposal to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

(To consider further amendments to the Scheme of Delegation to Officers

Report of the Head of Democratic Services enclosed)

The Advisory Group considered a report from the Head of Democratic Services seeking endorsement to changes  to the scheme of delegation to officers.

Members were advised that subsequent to a number of changes to the Scheme of Delegation to Officers which reported to Council at the Annual meeting on 18 June 2009 the Director of Corporate Resources had subsequently advised that adjustments to  the Scheme of Delegation were required to pick up certain functions which had been excluded or required amendment as follows:-

(i)                 Tax and VAT matters

                  There was no specific delegation to permit the Director to manage   tax and VAT matters

(ii)               Property Matters

The existing delegation in relation to property matters needed to be amended to include surrender or termination of leases, tenancies, licences, easements which were included in the Shadow Constitution but had been omitted from the current version.

The Advisory Group in supporting the proposed revisions noted that as both delegations were executive functions, it would also be necessary to seek the approval of the Leader of the Council to the proposed amendments and the relevant Portfolio Holder.

RESOLVED:

That, subject to the approval of the Leader of the Council, the proposed revisions to the scheme of delegation to officers as set out in the submitted report be approved.

(To review the current restriction within the Constitution on member of the overview and scrutiny committees serving upon the Audit Committee.

Report of the Head of Democratic Services enclosed)

The Advisory Group considered a report from the Head of Democratic Services  to review the current restriction within the Constitution on members of the overview and scrutiny committees (OSC) serving upon the Audit Committee.

Members were advised that Constitution and Working Group at its meeting on 26 November 2008 concluded that the draft Constitution should specify that no member of the Executive and no member of the Corporate Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee should be a member of the Audit Committee and that no member of the Executive should serve upon the Committee. However it had not been accurately captured in Part E2 of the Constitution which states:-

7 members including no more than one member of an overview and scrutiny committee other than Corporate Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  A member of the Executive may not be a member of the Audit Committee.

Members wee advised that as a result of appointments to the Committee at the Council’s AGM a number of members to the Audit Committee also sit upon overview and scrutiny committees.  However, as there were 46 seats available on overview and scrutiny committees avoiding  overlap between overview and scrutiny and Audit committee would be difficult to achieve and a blanket restriction providing for just one overview and scrutiny member might not be practicable.

The Advisory Group in reviewing the current membership agreed it should have regard to CIPFA guidance in relation to Audit Committees having independence from both the overview and scrutiny and executive functions. For this reason the Advisory Group concluded that  the Constitution should be amended to reflect Members’ original intention in that no member of the Corporate Resources OSC should sit upon Audit Committee.  It was recognised that it would then be necessary to replace the one member of the Audit Committee who currently sits on both the Corporate Resources and Business Transformation OSCs.  It was also agreed that whilst the Constitution was silent as to any restriction upon Assistants to the Portfolio Holders, they should not sit on the Audit Committee. 

RECOMMENDED:

That the Constitution be amended to state that no more than one member of the Corporate Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee may sit upon the Audit Committee. A member of the Executive and Assistants to the Portfolio Holders may not be a member of the Audit Committee.

(To request the Advisory Group to consider an amendment to Part A4 of the Constitution regarding the consideration of petitions relating to traffic regulation orders etc.

Report of the Head of Democratic Services enclosed)

The Advisory Group considered a report from the Head of Democratic Services in relation consideration of petitions relating to Traffic Regulation Orders.

Members were advised that the procedure within the Constitution currently provides for petitions to be presented to the Council, the Executive or a Committee. Given that the Leader of the Council had put separate arrangements in place for consideration of traffic regulation orders at  meetings of the Safer and Stronger Communities Portfolio holder it was proposed that petitions relating to road traffic regulation orders could be considered at these meetings.

The Advisory Group in accepting the logic for petitions associated with road traffic regulations being considered in greater detail at these meetings felt that the agreed petition procedure in Part A4 of the Constitution should continue to apply i.e. Road traffic regulation petitions continue to be acknowledged by the Monitoring Officer and submitted to the next meeting of the Executive for public receipt, but then referred on to a public meeting of the Safer and Stronger Communities Portfolio holder.  The petitioners and ward councillors would then need to be advised of the date of the meeting and invited to make representations as currently set out in petition procedure.

RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

That petitions relating to Traffic Regulation Orders continue to be submitted to the Executive for public receipt with the recommendation that they be referred on for detailed consideration to meetings of the Safer and Stronger Communities Portfolio holder when dealing with Traffic Regulation Orders.

(To invite the Advisory Group to consider a draft Guide to the Constitution and to review any other arrangements felt to be necessary to promote understanding and knowledge of the Constitution.

Report of the Head of Democratic Services enclosed)

The Advisory Group considered a report from the Head of Democratic Services seeking comments on a draft Guide to the Constitution.  Members views were also sought on any other arrangements felt necessary to promote understanding  and knowledge of the Constitution. 

Members in discussing the draft guide suggested rather than having a guide it would be more helpful to have links set up on the web site that referred users to parts of the Constitution as well as cross cutting references. Members also suggested that a list of frequently asked questions would be helpful and a list of How to do things e.g. How to deal with a call-in, how key decisions are made etc.

The Advisory Group in discussing the proposals set out in the report to promote understanding and knowledge of the Constitution also suggested that further guidance needed to be given to officers. It was suggested that officers could look into developing an on line test as a means of increasing awareness and understanding.

RESOLVED:

That the actions already taken or proposed to be taken to promote understanding and knowledge of the Constitution be noted.

Tuesday 25 August 2009 at 2pm at Priory House.