The District Council administration is pushing to reform or replace the Area Committees, and so the Review Committee looked at proposals to replace the Area Committees by Community Forums. So basically what are now the public question sessions at the Area Committees would become meetings in their own right.
The Review Committee managed to adjust the proposals to make them a bit fairer and less undemocratic. The original proposals suggested the panel that would answer questions would be made up of Cabinet members and officers – which is pretty weird , as the idea of Area Commitees was to give backbench councillors a role. And it would be a tad unbalanced – like having BBCs Question Time only having Tory Mps on it!
However the Review Committee contains some conscientious Tory backbenchers , who helped amend the proposals so that the panel would consist of all District Councillors for that area. That would still marginalise Parish Councillor representatives, though they would still be able to ask questions from the floor (and might actually being in a stronger position that way).
So , instead of three area committees meeting six times a year in every noon and cranny of the district, there are likely to be two area forums – one normally in Rochford , one normally in the Civic Suite Rayleigh, each meeting 3 times a year. Hullbridge will probably be included in the West Area with Rayleigh and Rawreth…..
Chris, your comments make it sound as if the new arrangements will improve debate. I submitted a question, about open democracy, at this week’s CAC which specifically asked for the committee’s view and received a written response from Shaun Scrutton. When I reiterated my question asking the committee’s view, there was near silence. Seemingly the Area Committees do not have views (or are afraid to voice them!)
If the new format means more time to quiz councillors in depth, then it may be a good thing.
Brian, I hope you will recall that I specifically pursued your question in a very direct manner having the “last word” by calling for the Council to be open and honest on the status of its presentation of the Allocations Option DPD Consultation on the Council’s web site. I do not consider that your comment “there was near silence” representative of the support you received from me. Nor was I afraid to voice my views then or now in response to your comment above.
Brian, I’d really like to think that this will work. But I should mention that the council HAS to have some kind of system like this, because of the localism bill that the coalition government is bringing in. So let’s just hope this isn’t simply a box-ticking exerise….
I agree Chris. The proof of the pudding….as they say.
May be cutting out the advanced, written questions will mean we will get meaningful responses rather that the politically correct, meaningless stuff we get now.
I’m not holding br breath though.
Brian I did speak up on the matter if you remeber, I may not have said what I intended because I was still stunned by the officers answer to your question as clarrified by John.
Yes Michael, I do remember your speaking. As I say, I was trying not to pick out individuals but I remain surprised that so few Conservatives would even try to defend their council. Silence speaks volumes sometimes!
Brian I wish there was a debate but there is a great big nothingness .Most councillors sit on their hands or sleep ,the opposition do their best but there is nothing to bat against .You know much of what the officers will say but when I ask a question I need to know wether the councillors have a view or are aware of the issues .
Alistir the “opposition” (apart from the independents, Cllrs Mason & Hoy) have been very quiet on this one. Is this a coalition deal?
Brian, do you mean a deal on Area Committees / Community Forums?
There’s no ‘deal’. June Lumley has the difficult task of the only non-Tory on the Review Committee of chiaring the meeting, and she does it well.
Makes you wonder too though how she manages to allow non-members of the committee to come along and speak when the Ledaer of the Cabinet finds it too difficult to allow non-members to even sit at the table at his meetings…
The original proposal – only having cabinet members and council officers on the panel – would have been very disappointing and hopefully we can avoid that now….
Sorry – no. I meant that the LibDems have been very quiet on RDC not completing the analysis of last April’s DPD consultation. Cllr Hudson says this is to save money whilst Core Strategy “stalled” but it should have been done last May. It means that RDC can continue to ignore the overwhelming rejection by a record 8,000 representations. Democratic it isn’t and the council shouldn’t be allowed to get away with it.
I raised this at the CAC and even the conservatives present (apart from KH obviously) didn’t defend it.
According to the “Excecutive” recommendation to be put to Full Council on 25 January it reads to me that Ward Councillors will NOT be on the new Panels but “they are expected to attend appropriate meetings so that their electorate have this additional opportunity to CONVERSE with them.
NOT to be able to ASK QUESTIONS of Ward Members as a member of a panel.
This amendment sought by the Review Committee and outlined in this article is lost in my view.
So meeting and asking questions of Ward Members turns into turn up and have chat with your Ward Member before or after the main show run by the Executive on the chance that your Ward Member is available to attend.
Will the “expected to attend” be subject to any whip or political group requirement?
NO ROLE in future for Councillors other than the Cabinet !!
I agree with you on this John. The Community Forum as proposed will cement power even more to the Executive and Leader of the Council whilst removing the Area Committees small, if poor, level of scrutiny.