Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive apologies for absence from Committee members.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Lina Nieto, Bridget Smith, Aidan van de Weyer. Councillor Richard Williams was in attendance as substitute for Councillor Lina Nieto.

To receive declarations of interest from committee members.

There were no declarations of interest.

To authorise the Chair to sign the minutes of the meeting held on 24 October 2024 as a true and accurate record.

The Committee authorised the Chair to sign, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday, 24 October 2024.

If you would like to ask a question or make a statement, then please refer to the

Document called Public Speaking Scheme (Physical Meetings)

and contact Democratic Services by no later than 11.59pm on 22 January 2025.

A question from Mr Daniel Fulton had been published in the additional information pack. There were, however, no questions asked at the meeting.

Civic Affairs Committee:

a)    Recommended to Council approval of the changes to the Council Constitution as set out in Appendices A and B to the report.

b)    Approved the amended Public Speaking Rights at Planning Committee Appendix C to the report.

c)     Approved the Members Planning Good Practice Guide Appendix D to the report - with minor amendments to paras 3.10-3.12 as agreed at SCDC Planning Committee.

Jane Rodens, Area Development Manager, presented a report to the committee, the purpose of which was to recommend changes to the Planning Committee delegations to support the provision of a consistent service across the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service. The revised delegations were also intended to allow for greater agility and ownership by the Planning Committee.

Committee Members discussed the report and in summary the points raised and response to questions included:

• It was advised that relevant Ward Members would currently only receive notification of an application being considered by the Delegation Panel if they were the ones to refer it. Arrangements were being proposed to extend this notification to Ward Members generally.
• Concern was raised around the clarity of the planning application call-in process within the proposals. It was confirmed that the procedure was set out within the delegation documents proposed to sit within the constitution and were summarised in the supporting guidance document.
• Further concern was raised in relation to single-Member wards and the impact proposals may have on them, however it was considered that nothing within the suggested delegation wording would put such Members in a detrimental position.
• It was noted that while the guidance notes would not have any constitutional or legal standing, the delegations would ensure that rules and procedures were clear.
• It was suggested that, when submitting the proposal to Council, it should be made clear that, by removing documents from the constitution the Council would be ceding its responsibility for making changes to such documents.
• Members sought reassurance that Planning Committee would not lose the ability to consider small planning applications.
• Discussion was had in relation to the Delegation Panel and whether substitutes should be arranged for when the Chair and Vice-Chair could not attend. It was ultimately considered that the panel was to canvas opinion and strength of feeling, and not to make decisions, so substitutes would not be necessary.
• Comment was made that the report and, in particular, appendices were difficult to navigate if not familiar with the planning process.

The Civic Affairs Committee (5 voting in favour, 2 voting against, and 0 abstaining from voting):

a)    Recommended to Council approval of the changes to the Council Constitution as set out in Appendices A and B to the report.

The Civic Affairs Committee (unanimously):

b)    Approved the amended Public Speaking Rights at Planning Committee Appendix C to the report.

c)     Approved the Members Planning Good Practice Guide Appendix D to the report - with minor amendments to paras 3.10-3.12 as agreed at SCDC Planning Committee.

Civic Affairs Committee approved the creation of an order appointing Cllr Mandy Smith, Cllr Peter Sandford and Cllr Mark Howell as temporary parish councillors on Croxton Parish Council.

At this point the Chair adjourned the meeting for a ten-minute refreshment break.

Andrew Francis, Elections and Democratic Services Manager, presented a report to the committee, the purpose of which was to appoint temporary parish councillors to Croxton Parish Council until new parish councillors were elected, as the Parish Council was currently inquorate and unable to perform its statutory functions.

Committee Members discussed the report and in summary the points raised and response to questions included:

• It was advised that the temporary appointments would be in place until new parish councillors were in place. If there was no request for an election within 14 working days of the casual vacancy being advertised, the Parish Council could co-opt new Councillors.
• It was suggested that the Council should consider how it encourages people to join parish councils.

The Civic Affairs Committee approved the creation of an order appointing Cllr Mandy Smith, Cllr Peter Sandford and Cllr Mark Howell as temporary parish councillors on Croxton Parish Council.

Civic Affairs Committee noted the ‘Strengthening the Standards and Conduct Framework for Local Authorities in England’ consultation and provided responses to the questions set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

John Murphy, Monitoring Officer, presented a report to the committee, the purpose of which was to provide the committee within information on the government’s statutory consultation around potential future changes to the sanctions available for a local authority when a Member was found to have breached the applicable Code of Conduct. The report also sought committee member’s views on the possible changes.

Councillor Heather Williams declared, for the sake of transparency, that she had sat on the Local Government Association roundtable when this issue was discussed.

Committee Members discussed the report and in summary the points raised and response to questions included:

• Comment was made that the proposals put forward were similar to the previous Standards Committee regime.
• Concerns were raised as to whether the proposals may generate conflict or result in unnecessary fear and unwarranted declarations of interests.

Mandatory minimum prescribed code of conduct

• Members considered that it would be useful to include detail around use of social media within any code of conduct for local authorities.
• Comment was made that a universal code of conduct would be helpful for those with seats on multiple authorities.
• An additional suggestion was made that there should be certain criminal offences that precluded being able to stand for office.

Standards Committees

• Concern was raised at the idea of internal politics feeding into authority-led committees and it was suggested that more regional standards committees would be more appropriate.
• It was felt that independent people should be involved in the committee, but for them not to made entirely of independent people.
• The importance of and standards committee receiving independent legal advice was emphasised.

Publishing investigation outcomes

• Anonymity was considered to be important during the investigation stage of the process, however, it was suggested that publication of outcomes was important to allow for the public to take on board all relevant information when electing Members.
• Suggestion was made that the proposals may allow for the complaints system to be used for political reasons and that anonymity could disincentivise vexation complaints.

Requiring the completion of investigations if a member stands down

• It was felt that investigations should continue even if a Member stands down, to account for a situation where the Member stands for election again.

Introducing the power of suspension with related safeguards

• Comment was made that the appropriate safeguards would be important, as well as ensuring that an appeals process was in place.
• Members considered that sanctions may disincentivise people from standing for election.
• The ability to cover ward work in single-member wards was raised, and it was noted that this would typically be a group issue and discussed across groups in the case of independent Members.
• It was noted that the definition of suspension needed to be clear, particularly in relation to whether suspended Members could continue to carry out case work or not.

The length of suspension

• Six months was considered to be appropriate, in order for Members not to breach the six-month committee attendance rule.

Withholding allowances and premises and facilities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

Civic Affairs Committee resolved to note the progress of any outstanding complaints and the conclusion of cases resolved since the last meeting.

The Monitoring Officer presented a report to the committee, the purpose of which was to provide an update on complaint cases regarding alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct.

The Civic Affairs Committee resolved to note the progress of any outstanding complaints, and the conclusion of cases resolved since the last meeting.