Agenda item - Review of Allocation of Seats in Committees and Appointments to Positions of Special Responsibility

Report of the Chief Executive (copy to follow).

81.1         Councillor Yates introduced the report of the Chief Executive and stated that it was important that the Council was governed in accordance with its constitution.  It was therefore necessary to recognise the changes in the size of the respective Groups represented on the Council and to review the committee allocations to ensure that the political balance was reflected appropriately.  However, he did not see the need to change the administration of the council or the positions of special responsibility at this late stage given the impending elections in May; and therefore, moved the amendment on behalf of the Labour Group that had been circulated with the addendum.

81.2         Councillor Mitchell formally seconded the amendment and reserved her right to speak in the debate.

81.3         Councillor Mac Cafferty stated that whilst he recognised the need to review the allocations to committees, he did not see the need to change the make-up of the council prior to the elections in May.  He believed the Conservative Group was attempting to take advantage to derail projects such as Valley Gardens and in this regard, he would be supporting the amendment.  There would be an opportunity for residents to express their views in due course, but in the meantime, they needed a degree of confidence in the Council and its services.

81.4         Councillor Janio stated that the situation had arisen because of a change in numbers to the Groups and it was convention that the largest Group then became the Administration.  As the Conservative Group was now the largest Group, they should form the Administration and should not be prevented from doing so by the Labour and Green Groups.  He therefore hoped that the convention would be upheld.

81.5         Councillor Deane sated that she felt the Green Group found themselves between a rock and a hard place, and in having consideration for the best for the city and the need for continuity it was evident that they should support the amendment.

81.6         Councillor Hamilton referred to the outcome of the previous elections and the percentage split in favour of the Labour party and argued that any changes at this point in time to the Administration of the Council would not reflect the views of the electorate or the democratic mandate that had been given to the Labour Group.  He therefore supported the amendment.

81.7         Councillor Littman stated that the Group faced a difficult choice and had to consider what meant the least harm for the city and to do the right thing for residents who could then make their views known in May.

81.8         Councillor Inkpin-Leissner sated that there was a need to change the politics which had become a charade and did not deliver what the city needed.  However, he would support the amendment and enable some continuity to continue until May.

81.9         Councillor West stated that he found no pleasure in having to attend today’s meeting and in giving consideration to the need to safeguard projects in the run up to the elections would support the amendment.

81.10      Councillor Mears stated that she had listened to the debate with interest and noted that the previous Conservative Administration had protected council services, whilst both the Green and Labour Groups had failed to deliver value for money.  She believed that the Conservative Group should be recognised as the Administration as it was now the largest Group on the Council.

81.11      Councillor Bewick stated that both the current Labour and previous Green Administrations had been able to sustain public services during a period of austerity and he did not believe that the Conservative Group really wanted to take control at this point.  He acknowledged that the Green Group were in a difficult position and stated that it would be better to wait and leave the matter to the electorate.  He hoped that at that point, they would the return a Labour majority to run the Council and serve the city with the residents’ interests at heart.

81.12      Councillor Gibson welcomed the proposal to appoint Councillor Hill as Chair of the Housing & New Homes Committee and stated that he could not agree with Councillor Mears given that the Conservative Group had sought to cut the budget that was agreed last week rather than support additional funding being put back to help to deliver new council homes.

81.13      Councillor G. Theobald stated that a decision to approve the amendment would be undemocratic and went against the conventions that the council had upheld since there had been a situation of no overall control for any Group.  The Conservative Group were now the largest Group on the Council and therefore should form the Administration and hold the various positions of responsibility.  He therefore urged all councillors to think about the matter carefully.

81.14      Councillor Page stated that he was aware the Conservative Group had requisitioned this meeting as a result of the change in numbers for their Group.  However, this was only 2 weeks and 2 days ahead of the start of the election campaign and he had wanted to hear the reasons for seeking the changes.  However, he had not heard anything to justify any change other than the need to reallocate seats on committees and could not support any other changes at this time.

81.15      Councillor Miller stated that he found it ironic that the Opposition Groups were voting against change and noted that they had adapted a Conservative amendment at the Budget Council meeting to meet their needs.

81.16      Councillor Phillips queried the need for the current meeting and the expense of having to meet today in view of the timing of the elections.  She believed the electorate deserved better and that matters should have been left until the elections in May.

81.17      Councillor Peltzer Dunn questioned the views of the two other main Groups and their desire to retain the current position for the remaining 2 weeks and 2 days.  He stated that he was surprised by their willingness to vote against having a Conservative Administration and believed this would be recognised in May.

81.18      Councillor Druitt stated that whilst he could not accept some of the points made in the debate, he did acknowledge the point made about the convention for the largest Group to form the Administration.  However, that was usually at the start of a term of office and not towards the end with only 8 weeks left.  It was better for the current Administration to see out the term of office having been elected to do so.

81.19      Councillor Mitchell stated that the Administration intended to complete the next committee cycle and all the relevant business that was coming forward.  There was a clear need to ensure that projects such as Valley Gardens were taken forward and the council and residents needed stability in the run up to the elections in May.

81.20      Councillor Yates stated that in 8 weeks and 3 days the various parties would know the will of the people and he took nothing for granted.  In the meantime, whilst he acknowledged the point raised by Councillor Theobald about convention, if the largest Group could not carry the confidence of the Council then it could not be placed to run the Council.  Hence the importance of the forthcoming vote on the matter and the need to support the amendment.

81.21      The Mayor noted that an amendment had been moved and asked for the electronic voting system to be activated and put it to the vote as detailed below:

81.22      The Mayor confirmed that the amendment had been carried by 30 votes to 20 with no abstentions.

81.23      The Mayor then put the recommendations as amended to the vote as detailed below:

81.24      The Mayor confirmed that the recommendations had been carried by 30 votes to 21 with no abstentions.  She also noted that the allocations to committees had not been notified and therefore would be confirmed by Group Leaders following the meeting in accordance with the note on the Addendum.

81.25      RESOLVED:

(1)         That the appointment of Councillor Hill to the position of Chair of Housing & New Homes Committee, for Councillor Hill to replace Councillor Meadows as Chair of Homes for Brighton and Hove; the appointment of Councillor Platts as Chair of the Procurement Advisory Board be approved; and otherwise it be agreed to make no other changes to any special responsibility positions including the Leader, Deputy Leader, Chairs of Committees and Lead Member roles;

(2)         That the appointment/re-appointment of committees with the sizes and allocation of seats between political groups as set out in the amended Appendix 2 to the report be approved;

(3)         That subject to (2) above, having received nominations to the committees from the 4 political groups, such nominations be agreed, and the committee places filled accordingly;

(4)         That an urgency sub-committee for each committee be appointed in accordance with Procedure Rule 22 (such committee being politically balanced but not included in the total number of seats for the purpose of allocatingseats); and

(5)         That the exemptions from political proportionality requirements currently in existence (Personnel Appeals Panel etc.) be continued.