1. A-Z of Services
  2. A
  3. B
  4. C
  5. D
  6. E
  7. F
  8. G
  9. H
  10. I
  11. J
  12. K
  13. L
  14. M
  15. N
  16. O
  17. P
  18. Q
  19. R
  20. S
  21. T
  22. U
  23. V
  24. W
  25. X
  26. Y
  27. Z

Agenda item

Amendment to the Constitution and Staffing Arrangement (Presentation Update)

Minutes:

Invitees:

Leanne Rowlands – Democratic Services Manager

Gareth Price – Head of Law and Regulation

 

The Democratic Services Manager covered the first section of the requirement to update the constitution as part of the Local Government and Elections Act and explained that it is in preparation for a full review.

 

Key Points:

The Head of Law and Regulation advised the Committee that Members previously considered the option of appointing a Presiding Member 2-3 years, but recommended to Council that the current mayoral role should continue. The officers put it forward to the Members today to reconsider their previous decision about having a presiding member model for the future, in the light of the review of the democratic arrangements, the change to remote/hybrid meetings and the modernisation agenda.

 

The Head of Service summarised the points in presentation of having a separate member to chair council meetings. It has been introduced through the Local Government & Democracy Wales Act from the Welsh Government as chairing council meetings involves a different skill set from the role of Mayor.

 

It was also noted that the council has put in a formal bid for the Mayor to be upgraded to Lord Mayor as part of the Queen’s Platinum Jubilee honours to be considered next June. If Mayoralty were to be upgraded, there may be more demands on that individual’s time as well.

 

The Officers  advised that any changes would take effect as from next May as the move to hybrid meetings requires a different skill set and noted that many other authorities have done this as that Member can hold office to build up that level of expertise.

 

Committee raised the following points:

 

·         The Chair asked if the Presiding Member post would be a paid post and if there would be two posts; one being the deputy.

 

The Head of Service confirmed that the Presiding Member could carry an additional salary but the deputy member would not carry the senior salary. The Presiding Member salary would be £25,000.00 per annum. The Council was able to pay an additional senor salary as it was below the maximum number of 18 senior salaries, prescribed by the IRP.

It was highlighted that it would separate the role of Council from the Mayoralty. A Cabinet Member currently has to step down if they wish to become the Mayor as the law states a Cabinet Member cannot chair full council. However, with a separate Presiding Member chairing council, then this would free up a Cabinet Member to become Mayor under the seniority role and to fulfil the civic role, although they would only be eligible to receive one senior salary.

 

·         Councillor Watkins stated that they are happy with the system in place at the moment and noted that if the Mayor’s position got upgraded to Lord Mayor; they have a Deputy Mayor who could step into the role as a Presiding Member and therefore does not see the point in making a £25,000.00 salary position.

 

·         Councillor Whitcutt disputed the prior point and stated that it is a skillset to chair a meeting such as full council and stressed that the council needs to modernise the process. It was argued that politics should be set to one side as the Mayor’s role is ceremonial. Chairing council is political as they are making decisions and can be a highly contentious role at times. It was mentioned that some Members who have become Mayors, were daunted by chairing large meetings as some can be experienced and others not. Councillor Whitcutt also referred to the salary concern; in comparison to the £270 million budget and stressed it is important for them that the chamber operates efficiently and that the Members have the expertise.

 

·         Councillor Clarke stated that chairing a full council meeting could put Members off wanting to be Mayor as everyone has different skillsets. Especially with the hybrid meetings as the skills required are different from years ago as the role has now changed. It could also free up the Mayor’s time.
It was mentioned that other Councils could be looking at this as well, considering there are 18 senior salaries available; there is money available in the budget for the role.

·         Councillor Giles agreed with Councillor Whitcutt’s point and stated that it is time to develop expertise to ensure efficiency in the decision making process. The Member clarified that this is not a criticism of specific individuals as they are thrown into the position and trying to chair a complicated public meeting can be stressful. Councillor Giles also stated that the application to Lord Mayor status would be a great boost for the City.

·         Councillor M. Evans asked the officers to confirm who took the decision to apply for the Lord Mayor status as they had no knowledge of that. The Member argued that just because they allocate a Presiding Member; does not mean they will get someone who is fantastic and agreeing to pay an individual £25,000.00 per annum to chair only seven meetings a year is not something they wish to support. If it were an annual appointment, the group might not like the member’s approach and may not be able to remove them. The biggest concern expressed was that a Cabinet Member could also become the Mayor; and anyone who had been the Mayor, knows that is full time occupation.

·         Discussion ensued amongst the Members and Councillor Whitcutt disputed the prior point by stating the comment about the salary undervalues the democratic process to put jobs into pounds and pence. The Member reiterated the earlier point that the salary is a comparatively small amount in the budget. It was noted it is a stressful role with a lot of preparation needed. The Mayor takes highly political decisions in full council and argued that they should be divorced from that and passed to a person who should be able to do it. Councillor Whitcutt also mentioned that Mayors could be attacked for things they decide in full council via social media which can lead to personal attacks, which has happened in the past. It could insulate the Mayor from that.

·         Councillor Clarke referred to Councillor M. Evans’ mention of the Mayor’s role being a full time occupation; it will be even more so if the Lord Mayor’s Status is granted. Despite only chairing seven meetings, those meetings are the most important meetings that the council and Members have. Therefore they would want the professionalism to come through as everyone has seen examples of videos from other authorities on the internet. As other local authorities have already done this or are moving toward this, the Members should embrace it if they want to keep Newport moving with the times.

·         The Chair noted they have observed the diminution of the role of Mayor’s office and the role of events they can hold/attend. The council used to have a full office of staff now they do not have the depth of resources that there used to be.

In response, the Head of Service pointed out that there has been no diminution in the role of the Mayor. Due to budget cuts and austerity measures, the amount of the Mayoral budget they spent on hosting Council events has been reduced, but the Mayor continues to be fully supported in attending external events. Although there was no longer a dedicated mayoralty officer, the support work was being picked up by all of the Governance Team, so there was no reduction in support There was no restriction previous to that and the council does not wish to diminish the role of the Mayor due to less resources. Torfaen Borough Council has abolished the Mayoralty all together – Newport has never countenanced this.

The Head of Service clarified there would be no reduction in the role over the years. In terms of costs, the £25,000.00 is not an additional sum as it includes the Members’ basic salary. It would be an extra £9-10,000.00 on top of the basic member salary is paid.

In response to Councillor M. Evans’ point on Cabinet Members doubling up as Mayors, the Head of Service clarified they did not suggest they could double up but the legal impediment would be removed as the Cabinet Member’s chairing full council meant they could not run as Mayor.

It was mentioned to the Members that they can recommend that the Mayoral procedure continues and they were not suggesting that it could happen however the Cabinet Member is a full time commitments as is the role of the Mayor and the Lord Mayor could elevate that status.

·         The Chair queried if the office for Mayoralty would be upgraded with more resources should Newport City Council get awarded with the Lord Mayor status.

The Head of Service responded that they have not removed support for the Mayor but the budget for the Mayor and hospitality has been reduced due to the need to make budget savings. It was highlighted that there is not a single mayoral officer, but a number of Governance Officers to support the Mayor and chauffeurs. If the Mayor were to get the Lord Mayor status, the council should be able to accommodate that with the current resources.

·         Councillor M. Evans thanked the officers for the clarification on the Cabinet Members. And enquired about how the council agreed on the application for Lord Mayor status as other Members will raise questions that there will be additional work as the Mayor. And with the title change; how that could create additional work.

In response, the Head of Law and Regulation confirmed it was through a re-application as the council applied for Lord Mayor status back in 2011. This application was prepared by a team of officer led by the Democratic Services Manager and the events team. The Leader of Newport City Council supported it and the council was encouraged by the office of the Lord Lieutenant to apply. An expression of interest was submitted.

On the second point in terms of the workload; there would be more because of the status and different types of events. There would be no increase in volume of workload as the council works with all the Mayors to agree a work programme that fits in with what they can/want to do as Mayors. It is important that Mayors enjoy their role in office and that the council does not burden them with workloads.

·         Councillor C. Evans used an example of the public speaker role in parliament to see how they are elected to ensure impartiality. It was suggested that on the election of the speaker, they would need at least three nominations from different parties. In order to show transparency and lack of bias, the Presiding Officer could write in line with the constitution if someone wants the position, they would have to canvas support and get a significant amount of the opposition party to also agree. In terms of pay, it cannot be about political convenience as has been regarded as a pittance in earlier discussion. The appointment should be done on talent and the Newport City Council could copy the mechanism of the House of Commons. It was suggested they could embed it into the constitution where a Member must self-nominate and be transparent in line with Welsh Government to ensure the role is not just handed out.

·         The Chair of the Committee asked if the bid for Lord Mayor Status fails, would the appointment for the Presiding Member fail also.

The Head of Service confirmed that the appointment for the Presiding Officer would not fail. As the justification for the role is the skill set for the arrangements for the hybrid meetings going forward so the question would still remain.

The Head of Law and Regulation responded by stating if the council went down that route; the council would appoint the position. It was confirmed there has been no suggestion for it to be a political position and when they appoint a Presiding Member; the way they dispose that role must be apolitical. This would be for council to agree if Committee took the recommendation to council.

·         Councillor C. Evans added that the Welsh Government model differs from the Houses of Parliament model so it would have to be transparent on the appointment and it could be recommended that Members look at the model to elect a potential Presiding Member with using reference from the mechanisms used to elect the public speaker of the House of Commons.

·         The Chair of the Committee expressed their approval of the current system for the Mayoralty carrying out civic duties as the swearing of impartiality stands well with presiding over council meetings and noted that the natural turnover of that position yearly is healthy for council meetings.

 

Recommendations:

The Committee voted on the recommendation of the new model. The vote result was a tied vote with 4 in favour of appointing a Presiding member and 4 against (Councillor Hourahine had left the meeting by this time and did not cast a vote). The Chair did not wish to exercise a second and casting vote as the recommendation would need to be considered by full Council.

 

Agreed:

The Committee agreed for the decision to be taken to Council.

 

Supporting documents: