Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

It was noted that Councillor B Rolfe was substituting for Councillor Ms C Edwards.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Members’ Code of Conduct.

The notes of the last extraordinary meeting of the Panel are to follow.

RESOLVED:

That the notes of the last meting of the Panel, held on 9 November 2010, be agreed.

(Chairman/Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference of this Panel and associated Work Programme. This is attached. The Panel are asked at each meeting to review both documents.

The OSC is about to formulate next years OS work plan incorporating a programme for this Panel. In view of this, the Panel may wish to bring forward suggestions/ideas on topics for inclusion in its work programme for next year.

(1)        Terms of Reference

The Panel’s Terms of Reference were noted.

(2)        Work Programme

(a)        Item 5 E-Petitions – the Members were advised that since a report on E-Petitions had been agreed at Full Council, the Government had indicated that the Localism Bill would contain provisions for mandatory E-Petitions, to be repealed. However the District Council could retain E-Petitions if it so wished. The issue would be resolved in the summer of 2011.

(b)        Item 7 Member Role Accountability Statements – this report would be submitted at a later date.

(c)        Item 8 Appointments at Annual Council – this was on the current agenda as a scoping report.

(d)        Item 10 Member Training Review – this report would be submitted in March 2011 and would include E-Training.

(e)        Item 11 Annual Review of Financial Regulations including E-Invoices – this report had been submitted to the current meeting.

(f)         Item 14 Planning/Landowner Roles – details to be confirmed. This item needed further clarification from the Member submitting it.

(g)        Item 16 Supply of Water in place of coffee to meetings held in Committee Rooms 1 and 2 – Mr I Willett was making arrangements with Mr M Tipping, Assistant Director of Corporate Support Services.

(Chief Internal Auditor) To consider a report on the introduction of E-Invoicing procedures, following the pilot scheme requested by the Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel last year.

The Panel received a report from Mr B Bassington, Chief Internal Auditor, regarding Financial Regulations – Acceptance of E-Invoices.

Following the recommendation of the Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel on 29 March 2010 and the decision of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 15 April 2010, a pilot scheme of E-Invoices was set in progress with a number of ICT providers. The process of accepting E-Invoices involved the following:

(a)   invoices were received into a secure internal mailbox. During the course of the pilot, no duplicate invoices were received with no negating issues identified;

(b)   the process was exactly as with the receipt of paper invoices with the exception being that the invoices were received in PDF format and were printed in-house; and

(c)   additionally, with the invoices in PDF format data could be shared easily.

The Panel asked that E-Invoicing was currently accepted by many local authorities within their e-procurement systems. E-Invoicing streamlined and improved the efficiency of the creditor process and assisted in meeting a key requirement of the creditors’ policy ensuring invoices were paid to terms. Aside from the time lost by the mail process, it would be more practical for the authority to take advantage of any discounts offered on prompt payment.

Any costs added to invoices by suppliers for printing and posting costs would be avoided. Currently 16,700 invoices had been processed since April 2010.

With the authority supporting its local and small businesses, moving to e-invoicing, the Council would be eradicating some of the suppliers costs by removing the printing and mailing requirements. With the process more time efficient, payments would be swifter.

Security and fraud were high on the list when it came to risk to local authorities from this system. The move to e-invoicing was a much safer method of receiving invoices. Audit gave assurances in the move to e-invoicing, with respect to the receipt of invoices in PDF format into a secure internal mailbox.

RECOMMENDED:

(1)        That a report be submitted to the Council recommending that the amendment to Financial Regulations to present Acceptance of E-Invoices be approved.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To consider the attached report.

The Panel received a report from Mr S Hill, Senior Democratic Services Officer, regarding Review of Annual Council Meeting and Appointments Procedures.

At the Panel meeting in June 2010, Members agreed that a review should be undertaken on aspects of the Annual Council meeting.

Committee, Sub-Committee and Panel Appointments

Over the last 10 years, the length of Annual Meetings had remained fairly constant. The number of appointments required at the Annual meeting had declined over the years because of a number of reviews of outside bodies, and the introduction of more Leader decision making on executive appointments.

The one exception to the trend was the Annual Meeting in 2009, a county election year, when no new members were elected. On that occasion political groups had more time to sort out their appointment schedules in good time.

Issue 1 – Briefing of Group Leaders and Independent Members Regarding Pro-Rata Requirements before Elections.

The statutory basis for pro-rata memberships came from the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. There were four main principles for appointments to “ordinary committees:”

(a)        not all seats were allocated to the same group.

(b)        a group having a majority on the Council, must have a majority of seats on Committees.

(c)        the total number of seats on Committees must be allocated in the same proportion as the group memberships bear to the Council’s membership.

(d)        the number of seats on each Committee must be proportional to each group’s membership of the Council.

It was advised that these “rules” be reproduced for the Group Leaders meeting each year. Officers suggested a procedure for sending a reminder to Group Leaders before any election. An Excel spreadsheet should be dispatched to the Groups for filling in with the correct numbers allocated to each committee and/or Panel.

Issue 2 – How Consultation between Political Groups might be Improved

Traditionally, a meeting of Group Leaders was called a few days after the May elections once pro-rata calculations were carried out. The following issues were identified:

(a)               It was felt that supplementary agenda with appointments at Full Council should be avoided as much as possible as they caused confusion;

(b)               Within each political group, all candidates should be issued with a list of all the committees and panels before the election.

(c)               An Excel spreadsheet for groups with a list of wards and how many seats per ward would assist.

(d)               The Group Form needed signing early. The number of members signing formed the basis of the pro-rata. It was felt that more than one form could be circulated to speed the process and that officers could deal with the forms at a convenient time.

Issue 3 – Whether the Principle of pro-rata Allocations on Outside Organisations is still fit for purpose.

Allocation to outside organisations was set out in a protocol included within the Council’s Constitution.

Outside bodies that fell into the “Executive” category were appointed by the Leader. Last year this left only 21 representations and 4 deputies to appoint at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To consider the attached report.

The Panel received a report from Mr I Willett, Assistant to the Chief Executive, regarding Review of Executive Procedure Rule 1.6 of the Constitution.

The Cabinet requested that the Panel review Executive Procedure Rule 1.6 primarily for allowing its meetings to continue past 10.00 p.m. thereby providing the option of completing its business in one evening. Since the beginning of the municipal year there had only been two executive meetings extending past the 10.00 p.m. threshold. The Cabinet had expressed concern about the “guillotine” procedure in operation and had requested that the Panel examine the procedure with a view to removing it.

A number of measures had been implemented for reducing the pressure on Cabinet agendas. These were:

(a)               The Cabinet Agenda Planning Group was the first stage of the process in compiling the Cabinet agenda;

(b)               Reports were split according to major and standard priority; and

(c)               Draft Cabinet reports, in some cases, should become Portfolio Holder Decisions and be delegated as such.

With the recent agreement that members of the public could address the Cabinet on items of business for that particular meeting. The removal of the “guillotine” procedure for Cabinet would allow the timely resolution of the Cabinet’s business at one meeting.

Executive Procedure Rule 1.6 also contained a requirement to hold at least twelve Cabinet meetings each year. Since then the number of Cabinet meetings have gradually been reduced to the current eight per year, which reflected a desire both to increase the number of delegated decisions taken by Portfolio Holders and to economise in the number of meetings held each year.

The report recommended that this rule should be revised to reflect current practice, and amended to allow for a maximum of twelve meetings per year rather than a minimum. However, the Panel felt that it was more appropriate to delete this reference entirely and thereby leave it to the discretion of the Cabinet and the Leader of Council as to the number of meetings held each year.

RECOMMENDED:

(1)        That the Council be recommended to make the following amendments to Executive Procedure Rule 1.6:

(a)        the requirement to complete all business at a Cabinet meeting by 10.00p.m. being deleted; and

(b)        reference to a maximum number of Cabinet meetings being deleted from the Constitution.

The amendments to the Protocols requested by the Panel at the last meeting will be discussed at the Corporate Governance Group on 8 December 2010 with the officers concerned. If there is time to submit a revised report for this meeting, a report will follow.

It was advised that the report for Protocols for Statutory Officers was not yet ready for discussion and would be submitted to th next meeting of the Panel.

To consider which reports are ready to be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

The following reports were being submitted to the forthcoming Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

(a)        Financial Regulations – Introduction of E-Invoices; and

(b)        Review of Executive Procedure Rule 1.6

The next programmed meeting of the Panel will be held on 17 March 2011 at 7.30 in Committee Room 1.

The Panel was advised that there would be an Extra-Ordinary Meeting in February. Two dates were suggested:

(a)        10 February 2011; and

(b)        21 February 2011

Members requested that officers email the suggested dates to all the Panel members and await indications of their preferences.