Agenda item

The Committee heard from the Monitoring Officer who introduced the report. It was stated that the report served to update the Committee and sought approval for the second stage of amendments to the Council’s Constitution. The Monitoring Officer explained that towards the end of 2024, a legal health check was conducted on the Constitution and a briefing was provided to Members on the outcome, along with a copy of the legal advice received. It was summarised that the health check found the Constitution to be largely legally compliant, but updates and changes had been recommended to ensure compliance with current good practice and legislative changes.

The Monitoring Officer continued, explaining that the first recommended change concerned the Council's Standards Committee. It was advised that a local authority Standards Committee should exist independently rather than within the Governance and Audit Committee's sphere. Therefore, it was recommended that the Standards Committee be established as a full Committee in its own right.

The second change, it was stated, aimed to clarify that the Council's licensing functions under the Licensing Act 2003 were dealt with separately from other regulatory matters, as the Licensing Act 2003 constituted its own legal regime and required a separate Committee article. It was highlighted that the next amendment proposed changing Article 6 of the Constitution to “appoint” the Leader of the Council rather than to “elect” the leader, in line with the legal advice given and to reflect the Committee system form of governance.

The Monitoring Officer specified that the health check also recommended increasing the size of the Chief Officer Employment Committee to allow for a separate appeals panel if needed, whilst remaining quorate. It was confirmed that this change was to comply with the Joint National Council Process for Chief Officer disciplinary matters, ensuring the Officer subject to disciplinary action could refer any decision to a clean appeals panel.

The final change detailed in the report was to amend Article 10 to reflect the joint arrangements the Council had through the Central Lincolnshire Joint Strategic Planning Authority and the Joint Committee for Devolution. It was noted that these changes were recommended to be made to the Constitution in accordance with the legal advice received, and then to be progressed on to the Annual Council meeting in May 2025.

Members of the Committee raised a concern regarding the recommendation to “appoint” rather than “elect” a leader, questioning its alignment with democratic principles. In response, the Monitoring Officer explained that, under West Lindsey District Council’s Committee System form of governance, the Council was not in a position to elect a leader with executive powers unlike in a Cabinet Executive Model. This proposed change in terminology, it was clarified, was in order to ensure compliance with regulations. It was stated that the Leader of the Council was appointed as the person leading the largest political group and the Chair of the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee.

Members of the Committee acknowledged the explanation and the need for the amendments; however, repeated concerns were expressed regarding the proposed change in terminology. Members noted that the current process involved Councillors putting their hands up to support or oppose the choice of leader, which they stated constituted an election.

Further questions were raised, including whether the Leader must be the person leading the largest political group and whether the Leader must chair the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee. The Deputy Monitoring Officer responded that the Council's Constitution required nominations for the position of leader to be submitted seven days before the meeting, preventing counter-nominations on the night. It was highlighted that legal advice from a governance specialist indicated that, under the Committee System, the Council was not in a lawful position to elect a leader and must appoint by default the leader of the largest group as defined by political groups regulation. Officers summarised that the Leader of the Council had never been given executive powers, and thus the term "appointed" reflected the legal position and acted as an acknowledgement of their role. It was confirmed that the Leader could choose not to chair the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee, but that the Council Leader would be the leader of the largest political group.

In response to concerns and questions, the Deputy Monitoring Officer noted that opposition groups historically could submit nominations, but the leader of the largest group would typically prevail due to the size of their group.

Members raised repeated concerns were about the implications of the terminology change on the democratic process.

Vice Chairman Cllr Dobbie expressed support for the array of proposed changes, citing the need to adhere to legal advice.

Further discussion highlighted the desire to clarify the legal advice and its implications. In response, the Monitoring Officer suggested to the Committee that the date of receipt of the legal advice and the relevant regulations could be added as a footnote in the document to ensure the reasons for the change were clear. 

The Chairman summarised aspects of the debate, concurring that democracy constituted a choice, even if the outcome was inevitable; however, it was acknowledged that even with a change to the terminology to “appoint”, the practise would remain the same.

A suggestion was made by the Chairman that the Constitution could be amended with the other proposed changes, whilst seeking further legal clarification on the specific point of appointing versus electing the Leader of the Council. With Officers in agreement, the Chairman formally proposed for the Monitoring Officer to seek further clarification on the legal advice, whilst removing the proposed terminology change from the report’s recommendations and proceeding with the other constitutional amendments.

Regarding the proposed change in terminology, the Chief Executive outlined the potential issues surrounding electing a Leader in the event of a hung Council. It was cited that if the leader of the largest political group was unable to secure a majority of votes, it would lead to difficulties regarding what the Council was legally able to implement.

A Member of the Committee made a request for a recorded vote, which was duly seconded.

On being put to the vote, votes were cast in the following manner:

For: Councillors Barrett, Brockway, and Bunney

Against: None

Abstain: Councillor Dobbie

With a total of three votes cast in favour, no votes against and one abstention, and with the amendment to the seek further clarification on the legal advice agreed upon, after been moved, seconded and voted upon, it was therefore

RESOLVED that

a)    the position in relation to the Constitutional amendments relating to articles and Committees had been received and noted; and

b)    the Constitutional amendments, as outlined in Appendix 1, be accepted, with the exception of “appoint a leader”, and it be RECOMMENDED to full Council for approval on 12 May 2025