Agenda item

To consider the member motion: Committee System Working Group.

Councillor Light presented her motion regarding the proposed establishment of a Committee System Working Group.

She requested that a democratic committee system be established through a working group chaired by Councillor Coote to enable Full Council to make decisions and fully represent residents.

She proposed the motion set out on the agenda.

Councillor Sell seconded the proposal.

Councillor Coote confirmed that he would not chair the proposed working group.

Councillor Sell said that he felt more involved with the work of the Council when it was a committee system. Members were told in 2011 that they were one of very few Councils operating a committee system and that they had to move to a cabinet system. The majority of Councillors were not happy as they were concerned that they would lose influence and power in decision making. He said that a number of authorities and reinstated a committee system, and, by way of example, that Sheffield City Council had a referendum last year and would move to a committee system in May 2022. He believed such a system would bring better governance, more transparency and would allow residents to have more of a say. He noted that Full Council was often time restricted and was not a policy making forum, and the move to a committee system would benefit all councillors. He urged Members to support the motion.

Councillor Jones said that he would not support the motion as he saw little evidence signifying that a committee system would be better than a cabinet system. He said R4U had pledged to review the current system and this review had been undertaken by the Governance Review Working Group. He said that the cabinet system was democratic and transparency had been increased under the current Administration.

Councillor Pavitt said that if moving to a committee system ensured an end to the party grandstanding he would be supportive, but he acknowledged that he would require guidance on this and the intricacies of moving to a committee system.

Councillor Lavelle confirmed that the motion gave him concerns on the following issues and that he would not support the motion:

• The motion instructed the Council to change the system, not evaluate the system.
• The motion stated that the cabinet system was undemocratic; he did not accept this statement.
• He noted that of the 27 Liberal Democratic controlled district, borough and city councils 16 operated a cabinet system and 5 operated an executive system.

Councillor Caton said there was not enough engagement of non-executive members in policy making under the current system.

Councillor Bagnall noted that the motion lacked thought and evidence and should have captured the resource, financial and process implications. He said that he would not support the motion.

Councillor Isham said that the administration had changed its position on the Committee system; originally they had committed to changing the system, now it was only a commitment to reviewing the system.

Councillor Foley confirmed that the flawed wording of the motion was unfortunate and noted that he had served under cabinet and committee systems and could identify problems with both systems.

Councillor Gregory raised a point of order; he noted his disappointment that Councillor Caton was interrupted by the Chair whilst giving his statement and noted that Councillors should be listened to with respect and allowed to make his points.

Councillor Light confirmed that research had already been conducted and that was why the changes had been suggested. She confirmed the need to be more democratic in the decision making process and asked Councillor Coote to remind Members of his statement at the conclusion of the Governance Review Working Group.

In response, the Chair recalled that he had said there was no common ground between members for him to recommend a way forward.

Councillor Light proposed that members review the options in view of the anticipated changes over the next few years.

The Chair moved to the vote.

The motion was rejected.

The meeting was closed at 8.30pm. 

Summary of Public Statement(s)

Mr Woodcock, a resident of Stansted Mountfitchet spoke on an urgently needed NHS support service issue previously communicated to the Council in July 2020 and more recently to UDC officers and Stansted Mountfitchet Parish Council (SMPC). He informed the meeting of his intention to request further help from MP K Badenoch.

He asked whether the community had been made aware of a pharmaceutical needs survey and noted that to dispense NHS prescriptions a license must be granted by NHS England, which relied on Essex County Council`s Pharmaceutical Needs Assessment (PNA) for guidance.

He stated that in 2018 neither Uttlesford District Council (UDC) or SMPC received notification of surveys and therefore could not participate. The 2018 PNA was currently being reviewed. The 2018 PNA stated that nearly all of the Essex population could reach a pharmacy within twenty minutes, but he said this failed to consider climate change and rested on the assumption that all residents had a car. His petition, started in January 2022 and signed by 664 residents, supported the need for a licensed pharmacy to be located next door to Stansted Mountfitchet doctor’s surgery. Mr Woodcock also highlighted access issues to the Boots pharmacy on the High Street for residents requiring wheelchairs.