Issue - meetings

To receive a presentation on the transparency of officer decision making covering Constitution elements and the accountability to Councillors.

The Monitoring Officer gave a presentation on the transparency of officer decision making and accountability to councillors, a copy of which appears at Appendix ‘C’ to these minutes in the Minute Book.

The content of the presentation covered key areas including the Constitution, financial thresholds, the scheme of delegation?, types of officer decisions, other forms of officer decisions and decisions made by statutory officers (s5 and s114 reports)?. The Monitoring Officer took the opportunity to confirm that she was satisfied with the current wording of her responsibilities under the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 as set out in Article 11 of the Constitution with no changes proposed.

Committee members talked about the importance of ward member engagement and the need for this to be embedded. It was noted that ward members were invited to comment on draft reports through the modern gov system where the issue affected their ward. The Monitoring Officer agreed that this process be highlighted when the councillor induction programme was considered by the Standards Committee. She explained that officers were encouraged to be proactive in communicating with ward members outside of the formal report process, something members felt should be reinforced as part of the officer induction programme.

A concern was raised about the mechanisms available internally and externally for councillors to challenge officer decisions, in terms of there being a lack of sufficient recourse to raise issues in the public interest. The Monitoring Officer assured members that the decision-making process was heavily monitored and regulated. She outlined the mechanisms available internally, including provisions under the Constitution, the formal complaints process and the role of Internal Audit. Externally one could apply for judicial review, although it was commented that this was an unlikely and costly option. Governance concerns could also be raised with the External Auditor who had the power to undertake an independent investigation and require mandatory responses from the Council’s statutory officers and was comfortable in doing so. It was noted with support that the Portfolio Holder for Finance met regularly with the External Auditor on a one-to-one basis to raise issues and concerns.

The Monitoring Officer also responded to points raised by members as follows:

·       The definition of a ‘key’ decision – this would be added to the final version of the presentation slides.

·       The process followed by statutory officers in coming to an informed collective view on a case-by-case basis should Cabinet and officers not agree on the proposed category of decision. It was noted that this was not a s5 report.

·       The level of detail contained in the published officer decision record

·       The process followed by statutory officers when issuing a report to suspend decision making and the challenges of meeting the 21 day timescale.

The Chair thanked the Monitoring Officer for her presentation.