Agenda item

The Civic Affairs Committee NOTED that the issue of the Council recording its public meetings was an executive function and that this would therefore be considered by the relevant Portfolio Holder or Cabinet, taking into account the views put forward by Members at this meeting.

Graham Watts, Democratic Services Team Leader, introduced this item and highlighted that an oversight had occurred in respect of the report.  He explained that the Civic Affairs Committee had previously considered the issue of whether the Council should record its public meetings alongside the introduction of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, and the initial guidance published in 2013, in terms of the respective constitutional amendments that were required at that time to comply with this legislation.

This item originally sought a recommendation from the Civic Affairs Committee to Council as to whether it should introduce the provision of recording its public meetings, but Mr Watts explained that as no constitutional amendment was necessary as a result of this decision it would now fall under the Council’s executive functions.  This meant that any decision on the issue would need to be taken by the relevant Portfolio Holder or Cabinet.

It was emphasised that the report only showed some of the technical options available to support the Council recording its own meetings and that further work would be undertaken to fully explore all of the options available. 

The Chairman invited Members of the Civic Affairs Committee to put forward their views on the principle of the Council recording its public meetings, further to which the following comments were noted:

·         the Council should record its public meetings in order that it had an official recording that could be uploaded onto the website for people to view, rather than relying solely on recordings uploaded to sites such as YouTube or social media by members of the public;

·         there was already enough pressure on officer time and the introduction of any facility for the Council to record its meetings would incur officer resource;

·         meetings were already open to the public so people already had the opportunity to attend, listen to debates and even participate in some cases;

·         the cost of any facility introduced should be kept as low as possible;

·         the provision for the Council to record its meetings was about openness and transparency, with any reluctance to support such an initiative perhaps being a generational issue;

·         times had changed and in view of the fact that members of the public were entitled to film meetings the Council should provide its own record of proceedings, but it should be done properly with visual and sound recordings being of sufficient quality;

·         it was inevitable that Councils would be compelled to provide recordings of their meetings in the future at some stage, so the Council may as well put the facility in place now prior to being required to do so;

·         the Council could record meetings on an adhoc basis when there was significant public interest in a particular item, rather than committing to record all meetings;

·         providing recordings of meetings would be a useful way of encouraging more people to get involved in local government and play a more active role in their communities.

The Civic Affairs Committee NOTED that the issue of the Council recording its public meetings was an executive function and that this would therefore be considered by the relevant Portfolio Holder or Cabinet, taking into account the views put forward by Members at this meeting.