Issue - meetings

The Chairman addressed the Committee and summarised the business to be transacted and the background to the matter

Given the recommendations were an ‘either or motion’ the Chairman considered it prudent to allow both motions to be debated at the same time.

Members debated the matter at length, speaking of their own experiences within the organisation.

Members asked numerous questions of the Head of Paid Service to ascertain actions taken prior to the current situation and any previous interventions.

In response to Members comments and questions which arose from this period of questioning, Statutory Officers advised that all relevant correspondence referred to by the Head of Paid Service, had been reviewed by the Council’s Independent Legal Advisor.  The reasons for seeking independent legal advice and the level of objectivity it brought were explained, as were the financial implications to date at the request of Members.

The External Legal Adviser addressed the Committee, confirming she had reviewed all documents referred to and provided to her and summarised her assessment of the implications for the Council with each of the options.

Questions were asked of the External Adviser, and there was lengthy discussion about the scenarios which could arise.

Following a further period of questioning of the Head of Paid Service, Members debated robustly each of the options, seeking clarification on a number of matters, implications to the wider organisation and delivery. 

Ultimately it would be Members who would need to make the decision as to the way forward.

Further discussion ensued amongst the elected Members, resulting in both options being proposed.  The External Legal Advisor indicated that the suggested addition to option one, referred to earlier in the debate, would be prudent, if Option one was deemed to be the preferred option.

A number of Members spoke against Option two, with ultimately Option one being the proposal seconded. 

Before moving to the vote the Monitoring Officer, summarised to Members the implications, supporting the addition referred to earlier in the debate.

Members confirmed that they wished the addition adding to option one and having been put to the vote it was: -

RESOLVED that Option one as detailed in the report be the approved way forward, with the addition of relevant internal procedures being referred to. 

Note 1: - Councillor Bierley requested that his vote against the above resolution be recorded in the minutes.

Note 2: - Reference in these minutes to legal advice does not amount to a waiver of legal privilege. 

The Chairman addressed the Committee and set out the reason for the meeting having been convened.

Since the calling of the meeting, circumstances in the days leading up to the meeting had changed, the nature of which was shared with the Committee.  The result being, the report that had been prepared required updating, and that further advice and clarification on the Council’s position was required.

The nature of the work being undertaken, as a result, was summarised to Members, alongside the external support being received, and the future decision the Committee would be asked to make in light of this.

Statutory Guidance relevant to the matter would be provided to all Members of the Committee prior to them making any decision and the importance of adherence to it was stressed by the Chairman.

Noting the above, a proposal to adjourn the meeting, pending an updated report was moved.  It was further proposed that the Committee reconvene on 5 September at 5pm.

Having been duly seconded, on being put to the vote, it was: -

RESOLVED that the meeting be adjourned, pending receipt of an updated report, and be re-convened at 5pm on 5 September 2024