To consider the corporate minute style used for meetings at Central Bedfordshire Council.

Consideration was given to a report on the corporate style of minuting following comments by a Member at Council on 20 April 2017.  The Committee was reminded that the Member had expressed concern regarding the level of detail contained in the minutes of the previous Council meeting and queried whether the preamble had captured the debate and met statutory requirements.

Points and comments included:

·         confirmation by the Head of Governance that the existing minuting style exceeded the current statutory requirements, although there were slight variations in style depending on the type of meeting being minuted.  In addition, where the webcasting of a meeting took place, and a verbatim record therefore existed, the minutes produced were as succinct as possible.  Where a webcast had not been made however, or there was substantial public interest in an item, then a more detailed written record was made. 

·         a Member read out a letter from the Member who had raised the original concerns.  The letter set out the Member’s concerns in detail and a suggested way forward.  A copy of the letter is attached at Appendix A to these minutes.

·         the Assistant Director Legal Services (Monitoring Officer) confirmed that only a committee’s decision needed to be recorded and there was no legal requirement to record the debate leading to the decision.  However, Members were strongly of the opinion that, whilst there was no legal requirement to record a preamble, there was an issue of public perception regarding the extent to which Members utilised the democratic process and the level of detail contained in the minutes needed to be increased in order to provide a full summary of the main points of debate.  The recorded webcast of a meeting was regarded as unreliable, difficult to navigate and not always available.  The possibility of an audio only recording of debate was suggested.

·         In response to comment regarding the accuracy of some minutes the Chairman reminded the Committee that the accuracy of the minutes could be challenged before they were signed.  The Head of Governance acknowledged that the six month time span that the recorded webcast was available was insufficient.  He also reminded Members that the individual agenda items were ‘flagged’ during the webcast so it was possible to locate them without watching the whole recording.

RESOLVED

1          that the following principle be adopted for all meetings:

As soon as practicable after any meeting a written statement of the proceedings at that meeting will be published that will provide the following:- 

a)    a statement of the matter under consideration;

b)   a few bullet points that provide a concise summary of the main points made in discussion, incorporating all motions and amendments presented to meetings in the exact form and order as put to the meeting;

c)    a summation of the item as provided by the Chairman (where applicable); and

d)   a record of the decision and date it was made including the reasons for the decision, the details of any alternative options considered and rejected, either detailed in the written report or proposed and seconded during the discussion of the report at the meeting; and any conflicts of interest.

2          that the number of votes for and against a motion be recorded;

3          that the main points of debate, which would impact on the outcome , be included in the minutes.

4          that should a Member raise a particular point that he or she wishes to have recorded in the minutes he or she should inform the Chairman of the meeting at that point in the debate;

5          that Members who do not attend a meeting but fail to provide their apologies be recorded as ‘Absent’.