Rochford District Council is just about unique in the UK, in that every councillor is on the committee that deals with planning applications. . We like it this way – it means that every resident has ward councillors to speak and vote on applications that affect them.
However there has been a feeling that every councillor should get regular training on the subject. So we have new rules this year. Every councillor needs to attend a training in session in May , and at least one other training session in the year, to keep their right to vote and move motions for approval or refusal (though they can still attend meetings and speak) .
If they miss a training session for good reason, they can appeal to the council’s Standards Committee to be given permission to speak and vote anyway. Chris Black is the Lib Dem on this committee.
The Standards Committee will be meeting on Tuesday night and will discuss this – however the details of the councillors are being kept confidential so we can’t tell you who they are or how many councillors are involved!
You can download the publicly available part of the report here (109k)
One question Chris, why. Why should this be confidential when the training is there and we, as residents expect our Councillors to attend. If there is a reasonable explanation why a Councillor cannot attend, why not make it public? Seems to me that yet again instead of making local government more transparent the Conservatives are giving us reasons to doubt their integrity, as if we needed any more reasons!
2.2 in the report looks interesting! If we are to believe what has been written in the report it appears that our Councillors are very clever, being able to pass a Council resolution in December 2009. Do these reports get proof read?
Hi Mike , taking your questiosn in order:
1) This is the first time the Standards Committee has been through this process, so things may change in future. It’s a good point that you raise. However I can see circumstances in which a councillor might not want their reasons for absence to be public knowledge , for example if it involved, say, the serious illness of a family member. Though if a dispensation is not granted, sooner or later that councillor would have to explain to one of their residents why they couldn’t vote on an issue.
It should also be borne in mind that the standards committee could if it wished ask the planning department to arrange an extra training to assist councillors who’d had to miss the previous one.
2) That’s a good spot Mike. Tomorrow I think we’ll be posting stuff atabout the East Area Committee – you should also find that one worth teading through!
Chris, the report is full of resolutions that refer to December 2009 but have a reference of xxx/08!!! Is this a professional council or what?
I agree that there may be a good reason why someone misses a training session but these should be given in a generic statement and the person named. The type of meetings we are talking about are very important to many people, the Councillors who are making these decisions should be fully trained. All of us who are professional people have to go through CPD every year, Councillors should be no different.
Mike
Whilst I realised that personal circumstances should not published in public for the good reasons that Chris puts forward, I had not realised that for administrative purposes the names of individual members who had or had not been granted a dispensation would not be published.
This concerns me because this is how the expenses debacle started if you remember with the Speaker trying to get information exempted under the FOI.
Perhaps someone on the Standards Committee might raise this?
I would hope so,John.It would be too easy for someone to shirk their responsibility for whatever reason. And the old pals act of letting someone off training and allowing them to vote! We have to have transparency and FOI must be implemented, no more hiding behind confientiality. Maybe we should start a league table of who is missing what training?
The residents must show the elected Councillors who really holds the power. Maybe we should have a ‘Councillor Watch’ for Rochford Council. That could be fun.
Mike, at last night’s meeting the officers acknowledged and apologised for the error with dates that you spotted. As for the rest – can’t comment till the minutes come out!
Chris – why can’t you comment? I thought we were in an age of freedom of information and open government?
Brian- the item was handled in Private and Confidential because it involved some councillors personal medical circumstances.
I probably could write some more but would prefer to wait and see what the public minutes say.
Brian . the minutes of the Standards Committee have not been published yet.
A list of the members of the development control committee is normally on the agenda for each meeting of that committee.
For example, the list is on the second page of last months agenda at
http://cmis.rochford.gov.uk/CMISWebPublic/Binary.ashx?Document=16477.
However a list is NOT included on the agenda of the next meeting:
http://cmis.rochford.gov.uk/CMISWebPublic/Binary.ashx?Document=16531
Open government seems to be taking a backstage once again.
Reading between the lines, do I take it that there might be some notable absentees???
Brian
The Minutes of the Standards Committee Meeting held on 9 June 2009 have been published but certain information has been put in an Exempt Appendix marked “Not for Publication by virtue of paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.”
You might like to read this link which explains how this works;
http://www.stockton.gov.uk/resources/council/stanprob/empcode/sch12a.doc
So the council is not going to publish who can and who can’t attend meetings?
A bit bizarre and will result in a guessing game! If a councillor does not turn up for a DCC meeting, will he she be recorded as “absent” or “not approved/banned”?
Hi Brian
If a Member attends a Meeting of a Committee of which they are not a Voting Member then they are shown as a Visiting Member.
There is no provision for showing if Voting Members were absent unless they send Apologies for Absence which are then recorded.
So if a Member who could not now vote did not turn up then you could not deduce this fact from Minutes.
Yes, it would be hard to tell if any Member lost voting status unless the Council declares on CMIS (look on council web site under members/committees)who is a Member of a Committee and by ommission that might advise residents.
I thought all councillors were members of DCC?
So how will absent cllrs be recorded?
Does the public not have a right to know who has been ‘barred’ from undertaking council business?
Lots of issues here?
Hi Brian
Yes, All Members can be on DCC.
If the Council reverts to listing Members of a Committee on the Agenda you could take the list and tick it back to the complete list of Members for Full Council.
Any ommitted would therefore not be Members of DCC for voting purposes.
Brian
If any councillor attends the development control committee when suspended from membership, they would have to declare that at the start of the meeting under an agenda item called ‘non-members attending’
For the sake of completeness, here’s the public minute. You can see that there were FIVE applications for dispensations and all were turned down.
134 MANDATORY TRAINING – DISPENSATION
(Note: Cllr P A Capon declared a personal interest in this item due to his being Vice-Chairman of the Development Control Committee)
The Committee considered the report of the Head of Information and Customer Services on applications for dispensation in respect of mandatory training requirements.
Five applications for dispensation from Development Control training had been received. Detail on the applicants and the discussion is set out in the exempt appendix to this Minute.
It was agreed that Councillors wishing to apply for dispensation from future mandatory training should make written representations to the Committee.
Resolved
That the requests for dispensation from the Members identified in the exempt appendix to the Minutes be turned down and that the Members concerned be suspended from membership of the Development Control Committee until they have completed the next available course of planning-related training.