STSECR
7/P/690/1/87
COUNCIL REPORTS - 18TH DECEMBER, 1986
PURCHASING POLICY: SOUTH AFRICA
1. In the light of recent widespread public interest, the Committee
have considered the County Council's purchasing policy with
regard to South African goods.
2. The present policy is simply to seek the best value for money
obtainable in relation to the needs of the services for which
purchases are made. Attention is paid to specification, quality,
total cost, delivery requirements, and service capability. It
has never been the policy to specify that produce from any
particular country should be avoided.
3. The only South African products purchased by the County Council
in recent years have been food, although there are items, e.g.
electronic equipment and artists paints, where the origin of the
raw materials used in manufacture is impossible to determine.
4. With regard to groceries and provisions, the only products
currently purchase are tinned pineapple pieces and tinned pear
halves, at an annual cost of approximately £11,000. In the past,
canned pilchards have been purchased.
5. With regard to fresh fruit and vegetables, the County Council
have supply arrangements with 25 firms. It is up to the
suppliers to decide the particular produce which represents the
best value from day to day. The 5 main suppliers all deal in
South African produce, the items concerned being mainly apples
and oranges, with smaller quantities of grapes and plums. It is
difficult to be precise about the value of expenditure on South
African fruit, but it may be of the order of £50,000 per annum.
6. During debate it was proposed that the County Supplies Officer
should be instructed not to purchase South African goods.
Members noted that it would be possible to find alternatives in
range and quality for all goods currently purchased and to do so
would not create serious problems for the Council's catering
services. A boycott would, in their view, clearly indicate the
County Council's view of the apartheid issue in South Africa.
7. The goods concerned, however, are purchased because they
represent good value and the Committee felt that as expenditure
on goods of South African origin was under £100,000 per annum and
the Council's food bill alone amounted to some £6 million, the
sum involved was not sufficiently significant to merit a change
in policy; nor would it have any effect on the position in South
Africa. Accordingly, they resolved that no change should be
made. Their decision, however, is submitted to the Council as a
recommendation, the requisite number of Members having so
requested under the Minority Order procedure.
RECOMMENDATION:
8. That no change be made to the existing buying policy and practice
in respect of South African goods.
PORTSMOUTH POLYTECHNIC, MERCANTILE HOUSE, PORTSMOUTH - PURCHASE OF
FREEHOLD
1. Mercantile House, Portsmouth contains 30,200 sq. ft. of floor
space and is occupied by Portsmouth Polytechnic. It houses a
computer centre on the lower floors and the upper floors are used
for statistical and language studies. The property is at present
leased by the County Council but following consideration of a
comprehensive report in March, the Committee gave approval in
principle to the purchase of the freehold.
2. Negotiations have been successfully carried out and the Council's
approval is sought for the purchase of the property at a cost of
£850,000. The debt charges in respect of the purchase will be
met from the Advanced Further Education Pool and as the Council
hold a long lease of the building, the capital expenditure will
not count against their capital allocation. An additional
capital allocation is to be sought from the Department of
Education and Science towards the cost of repairs which are
necessary to protect the fabric of the building.
RECOMMENDATION:
3. That the freehold of Mercantile House, Portsmouth, be purchased
on the terms negotiated by the County Estates Officer (£850,000).
PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS
1. Following a request from some employee representatives, the
Committee have considered the implications of making deductions
at source towards the "Hampshire and Isle of Wight Unemployed
Centres One Fund for All". Although the fund is not a registered
charity, Unemployed Centres are voluntary organisations and they
are experiencing difficulty in maintaining services through lack
of money. Trade Unions have pledged practical and material
support.
2. The Council's payroll system is technically capable of making a
wide range of deductions from pay but current policy is that they
are only made for schemes which are of direct relevance or
benefit to employees, e.g. trade union dues, savings, staff
amenity fund, health insurance, council rents, etc. The
Committee were concerned that if the request were granted a
precedent would be set which could lead to other requests for
deductions for a wide variety of purposes, possibly requiring
invidious choices to be made since the payroll system cannot
accommodate an open-ended commitment. It was also noted that the
case could not be met by a simple limitation to charities, since
the organisation concerned did not have this status.
3. In the course of discussion, reference was made to the existing
scheme for the deduction of B.U.P.A. subscriptions from pay, for
which an administrative charge of 2% of the subscription rate is
levied on employees who are members so that no running costs fall
on the Council. Some 2,000 members of staff are in the B.U.P.A
scheme and a proposal was made that the 2% administrative charge
should be waived. The estimated income to the County Council for
administration costs for B.U.P.A. in the current year is £19,600,
a sum which would have to be made up from other sources if not
recovered from subscribers.
4. After considerable debate the Committee arrived at the following
decisions which are submitted to the Council as recommendations,
the requisite number of Members having so requested under the
Minority Order procedure.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
5. That payroll deductions be not made for County Council staff
wishing to contribute on a voluntary basis to the "Hampshire and
Isle of Wight Unemployed Centres One Fund for All".
6. That the 2% administrative charge on voluntary subscriptions to
B.U.P.A. by members of staff be discontinued.
STANDING ORDERS FOR CONTRACTS - FAIR WAGES CLAUSE
1. In December, 1985, the Council declined a request to amend
Standing Orders by the introduction of a fair wages clause into
building and works contracts, which would embody the principle
that wage rates and working conditions would be no less
favourable than those established in the district where the work
would be executed and/or those negotiated between employers'
organisations and unions. Such a requirement used to be included
in Standing Orders but was discontinued in 1983 when the 1946
Resolution of the House of Commons, on which it was based, was
rescinded.
2. The view was taken that it had become unnecessary because the
increased bargaining powers of organised labour now acted as the
regulator of pay and conditions. Concern has continued to be
expressed that the absence of a fair wages clause permits the
exploitation of employee groups at the lower end of the labour
market, e.g. cleaners, where the private contractors rate is
currently between £1.70 and £2.00 per hour, compared with the
Hampshire County Council rate of £2.29 per hour. Consideration
has been given to the adoption of the following new Standing
Orders, proposed by Councillor Mrs. I.F. Candy:
"52 (1) This Standing Order applies to every written contract
for the execution of work or the supply of goods or the
provision of services of a manual nature, and to such
other contracts or classes of contract as the Policy and
Resources Committee may specify from time to time;
provided that it shall not apply to contracts entered
into by virtue of Standing Order 40.
(2) The contractor shall in respect of all persons employed
by him (whether in the execution of this contract or
otherwise) in every factory, workshop or place situate in
the United Kingdom and occupied or used by him for the
execution of the contract comply with the following
conditions, namely:
(a) the contractor shall pay rates or wages and
observe hours and conditions of labour not less
favourable than those established, for the trade
or industry in the district where the work is
carried out, by machinery of negotiation or
arbitration to which the parties are organisations
of employers and trade unions representative
respectively of substantial proportions of the
employers and workers engaged in the trade or
industry in the district;
(b) in the absence of any rates of wages, hours or
conditions of labour so established the contractor
shall pay rates of wages and observe hours and
conditions of labour which are not less favourable
than the general level of wages, hours and
conditions observed by other employers, whose
general circumstances in the trade or industry in
which the contractor is engaged are similar.
(3) The contractor shall recognise the freedom of his
workpeople to be members of trade unions.
(4) The contractor shall be responsible for the observance
of this clause by sub-contractors employed within the
United Kingdom in the execution of the contract, and
shall if required notify the employer of the names and
addresses of all such sub-contractors.
(5) In the event of any questions arising as to whether the
foregoing conditions are being observed, the question
shall, if not otherwise disposed of, be referred to an
independent Tribunal for decision.
53 Before entering into a contract to which Standing Order 52
applies, where the contractor has for the whole or part of a
period of three months immediately preceding the date of the
tender employed persons in any factory, workshop or place
situate in the United Kingdom, the Council shall obtain from
the contractor an assurance in writing that to the best of
his knowledge and belief he has in respect of persons so
employed complied with the general requirement of Standing
Order 52 for the said period of three months or part thereof
as the case may be."
If these Standing Orders were adopted, consequential
drafting amendments would be needed to Standing Orders 34
and 49.
3. During discussion, Councillor J.Y. Denham sought to extend
proposed Standing Order 52 (2)(a) above by adding the words: "and
in any event not less favourable than those paid by the County
Council for comparable works". The Committee noted that this
would have a significant financial effect because of the
restrictions it would place on contractors. On being put to the
vote, neither Councillor Denham's amendment nor Councillor Mrs.
Candy's proposal were adopted.
4. The Committee's decision in this matter is submitted to the
Council as a recommendation, the requisite number of Members
having so requested under the Minority Order Procedure.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. That no changes be made in the Standing Orders relating to
contracts in respect of the inclusion of a Fair Wages Clause.
CALENDAR OF MEETINGS
1. In December, 1985, the Council considered the frequency with
which their meetings were held and decided to adopt a calendar of
meetings drawn up on the basis of five Council meetings in the
year, one of which would be for the express purpose of dealing
with the budget.
2. The Committee have given further consideration to the matter,
with particular reference to the advantages and disadvantages of
holding six Council meetings each year. At present meetings are
held in February (Budget), March, May, September and December.
The proposed change would mean meetings in February (Budget),
March, May, July, October and December. This would increase
costs, but whereas the supporters of change believed that this
would be justified because each meeting, they suggest, would be
shorter and more manageable, opponents believed that no such
benefit would accrue. The Committee concluded that the present
pattern of meetings should not be changed. Their decision is
submitted to the Council as a recommendation, the requisite
number of Members having so requested under the Minority Order
procedure.
RECOMMENDATION:
3. That the present pattern of meetings be not changed.
USE OF PREMISES FOR MEMBERS' SURGERIES
1. The circumstances in which use of County Council premises by
Councillors for surgeries should be permitted was last considered
in 1979 and the Committee have, therefore, reviewed the position.
In so doing, they have taken into account the practice of other
local authorities and the cost implications. They concluded that
provided the premises were open and room was available, so that
no extra costs were involved, it was reasonable to allow Members
to hold surgeries in them free of charge. This rule would not
apply to premises (for example, residential establishments) which
were not available for public lettings.
RECOMMENDATION:
2. That the use of County Council premises which have accommodation
available for public use (such as schools, libraries, etc.) by
Councillors for ward surgeries be permitted free of charge,
provided that room is available, that the premises are in any
case open and that no extra costs are incurred.
FILLING OF VACANCIES ON COMMITTEES
1. At their meeting in May, 1986, the Council considered a report
concerning the filling of vacancies on Committees. The following
policy was recommended for agreement, its underlying principle
being to ensure the early participation of new Members in the
Council's affairs: "That the County Council will pursue the
principle that newly elected Members shall, if they so desire, be
entitled to be appointed to at least two standing Committees of
the Council as soon as practicable after being elected".
2. When the proposal was being discussed, Councillor M.H.C. Morris
proposed an amendment to delete the words "if they so desire" and
to add the following additional sub-paragraph:
"the membership of all Committees (except those restricted
by statutory requirements), Sub-Committees and Panels shall
be in proportion to the relative strength of the respective
political groups on the County Council".
The Council agreed to a suggestion by the Chairman that this
amendment should be referred to the Procedures Sub-Committee for
consideration.
3. Investigation by the Sub-Committee revealed a number of
difficulties. First it was found that with the present
composition of the Council panels of a certain size (i.e. 7, 11,
13 and 17) would not divide to achieve proportionality of party
representation and when adjustments were required the size of the
panel was usually increased, some reaching an unwieldy size for
the task they perform.
4. Another difficulty was trying to ensure places for the two
Independents, who did not qualify for places on committees even
when treated as a "party". Committees vary in size, with some
containing Independents and others not, and the question arises
as to whether proportion should be based on the composition of
the Council or of the Committee/Sub-Committee. The position is
further complicated when co-opted members are involved.
5. There are instances, particularly in Panels, where representation
based on political allegiance may not be the most suitable.
Issues affecting a particular locality can sometimes be best
dealt with by Members with local knowledge, especially where
"party politics" are not involved. There are sometimes
long-running issues on which continuity of experience may be a
major criterion. Problems can arise following by-elections, of
which there are, for one reason or another, about two each year.
A swing in the balance of power, together with the two-places
rule, may lead to the enforced displacement of a valued
committee/panel Member in order to make room for the newly
elected one.
6. With these points in mind, the Committee supported the
recommendation of the Procedures Sub-Committee that a practical
solution would be to adopt the proposal put forward by Councillor
Morris not as a rigid rule, but as a guideline to be followed
whenever practicable.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
7. That the County Council will pursue the principle that newly
elected Members shall be entitled to be appointed to at least two
standing committees of the Council as soon as practicable after
being elected.
8. That, as a guideline to be followed whenever practicable, the
membership of all Committees (except those restricted by
statutory requirements), Sub-Committees and Panels shall be in
proportion to the relative strength of the respective political
groups on the County Council.
ORDER OF BUSINESS AT COUNCIL MEETINGS
1. Consideration has been given by the Committee to the order in
which business is conducted at meetings of the Council. It had
been proposed that the present order, set out in Standing Order
5, be changed so that notices of motion would follow Committee
reports requiring decision (Part I) and be taken before reports
for information (Part II). This would mean that all items on
which a resolution is required would be dealt with before other
items on which, although discussion may take place, voting is
not required.
2. Sixty-one Committee reports were considered by the Council at
their last meeting and, of these, fourteen were Part I items and
forty-seven, Part II. Four notices of motion were dealt with at
the same meeting.
3. For some time Council meetings have been lengthy and have
invariably finished well into the evening. Supporters of the
proposed change saw an advantage in that it would reduce strain
on Members by enabling those who might not feel involved in some
of the later matters of report to leave the meeting earlier than
they would otherwise do without affecting the voting strength of
the parties. Supporters also considered that notices of motion
would be better dealt with when Members' minds are fresher rather
than towards the end of a long day. The fact that several
Members serve on other local authorities and were on occasions,
faced with competing commitments in the evening, was also said to
lend support for the change proposed.
4. The Committee, however, were of the opinion that matters
delegated to Committees were often very important and that many
Members wished to speak on the Part II reports. Often it was
their only opportunity to speak, or to question Chairmen, on
significant developments in the Council's statutory services.
These reports describe the core activities of the County Council,
for the discussion of which, in the presence of the press and
public, a Council meeting provides an important opportunity.
They felt that a change was not justified. Their decision,
however, is submitted to the Council as a recommendation, the
requisite number of Members having so requested under the
Minority Order procedure.
5. The Committee considered that the undermentioned time limits
should be imposed on speeches in respect of Notices of Motion,
and are to consider at a future meeting the length of speeches
during debates on Committee reports.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
6. That the present order of business at Council meetings be not
changed.
7. That the time limit on speeches in respect of Notices of Motion
be as follows:-
Mover of Motion - 6 minutes
Other Speakers - 3 minutes
Mover of Motion in reply to debate - 6 minutes
and that Standing Order 12 be amended accordingly.
RULES OF DEBATE - AMENDMENTS
1. The Committee have considered the rules of debate with regard to
the ways in which amendments to propositions are dealt with. The
rules are contained in Standing Order 15 but the Council have
often found it convenient to depart from them in two respects.
First they have, on occasion, held combined debates covering both
the substantive Motion and all amendments. Secondly, the
provision for giving notice of further amendments during the
debate has become obscured by the practice of circulating copies
to Members in advance and/or submitting amendments in writing to
the Chairman in advance.
2. The Committee were of the opinion that the Council should
continue to adopt the general practice of combining the debate on
a Motion and a single amendment and no change was needed in the
Standing Order in this respect. With regard to the more complex
position where there were two or more amendments, they did not
consider it possible to legislate for all such occasions and have
put forward an amendment (taken from the Model Standing Orders
published by the former Ministry of Housing and Local Government)
which would give a general discretion to the Chairman to allow
the debate (but not the voting) to be combined when appropriate.
3. The order in which speakers are called and the order in which
amendments are put to the vote when there has been a combined
debate are for the Chairman to decide. The Chairman normally
puts amendments to the vote in the order in which they are moved,
but he does have a discretion to vary this order in cases where
the relationship between the various amendments calls for a
different treatment. The Committee accepted these points, and
felt it would be helpful for them to be brought to the attention
of Members of the Council, by way of this report.
RECOMMENDATION:
4. That the following paragraph be added to Standing Order 15:-
"Provided that the Chairman may permit two or more
amendments to be discussed (but not voted on) together if
circumstances suggest that this course would facilitate the
proper conduct of the Council's business".
FORMAL MOTIONS - CHAIRMAN'S POWERS
1. Standing Order 15 (o) requires the Chairman, once a 'closure'
motion has been moved and seconded, to bring the discussion to an
end. The Committee have considered a proposed amendment which
would enable the Chairman, if he thought the subject had not been
sufficiently debated, either to decline to put the closure motion
(in which case a similar motion could be moved subsequently) or
to delay putting it so as to allow a specified number of further
speeches.
2. The Committee, who were particularly concerned to ensure that the
seconder of a motion or amendment should have the right to be
heard before the vote is taken, supported the proposed amendment.
RECOMMENDATION:
3. That Standing Order 15(o) be amended to read as follows: "A
Member who has not spoken may, at the conclusion of a speech of
another Member, move without comment 'that the question be now
put' or 'that the Council proceed to the next business' or 'that
the Council now adjourn', on the seconding of which the Chairman
shall put that motion to the vote without amendment or discussion
and, if it is carried, the question before the meeting shall
(after allowing an opportunity for a Member to speak in seconding
any motion or amendment which has been moved, and subject to the
right of reply given by Standing Order 15 (d)) be put to the vote
or the subject of debate shall be deemed to be disposed of for
that day or the meeting shall stand adjourned, as the case may
be; provided that if on the moving and seconding of any such
formal motion as aforesaid the Chairman is of the opinion that
the matter has not been sufficiently discussed, he may either
refuse to accept the motion at that time or he may indicate how
many more Members he will permit to speak before putting the
motion".
REPORTS TO COUNCIL -
(a) ITEMS REFERRED UNDER MINORITY ORDER PROCEDURE
(b) NOTICES OF MOTION
1. Traditionally reports to the County Council have been written to
explain the Committee's recommendation. Reference has not usually
been made to expressions of dissent in view of the Council's rule
that these are not normally recorded in the Minutes. Notices of
motion have been treated on the assumption that Standing Order
7(d) will apply, whereby if the subject matter falls within the
province of any Committee, the motion once moved and seconded is
referred without further discussion to that Committee for
consideration and report (usually to the next Council Meeting).
Recently both these practices have been called into question.
2. The introduction of the Minority Order Procedure with the
requirement for the alternative argument to be rehearsed, and the
circumstance when the Council decide to deal with a notice of
motion straightaway without referring it to Committee, have
created the need for the whole Council to be better informed
about issues since, in effect, the Council is called upon to act
as a Committee.
3. Clearly, it would be helpful for additional information to be
provided for Members but it would not be appropriate to do what
is done for a Committee meeting, i.e. issue all officer reports
and require the officers to answer points arising in the debate.
Another problem, particularly with notices of motion, is that the
proposer may have available a quantity of information which he or
she wants to put forward. There is, therefore, a need to decide
what approach is to be taken in these circumstances.
4. Following consideration, the Committee have proposed the adoption
of the following principles. At a future meeting, the Procedures
Sub-Committee are to consider a suggestion that information
should be supplied on the budgetary implications of proposals
moved under notices of motion.
RECOMMENDATION:
5. That the following principles be applied in respect of reports to
Council.
(a) In the case of Minority Orders
The report to Council should, as far as reasonably possible,
give equal prominence and space to the arguments being
advanced for and against the recommendation, as expressed in
the Committee meeting from which it emanates. With regard
to additional information, a statement expressed on behalf
of a political group will be circulated on request.
(b) In the case of Notices of Motion
Notices of Motion should be treated on the assumption that
Standing Order 7(d) will apply, whereby if the subject
matter falls within the province of any Committee, the
motion is referred without discussion to that Committee for
consideration and report (usually to the next Council
Meeting). Only in exceptional circumstances, where the
motion is to take executive action of some kind (i.e. a
decision which has to be implemented and cannot be
reversed), will officers consider the need for a report
assessing the implications and, where appropriate, offering
professional advice. Where the notice of motion is on a
matter of future policy of a general nature, e.g. support
for or opposition to a Government initiative, officers would
not normally proffer a report to the Council. Individual
Members may ask to be briefed and this service will
continue.
THE CONDUCT OF LOCAL AUTHORITY BUSINESS - REPORT OF THE WIDDICOMBE
COMMITTEE
1. The Committee have considered at a special meeting the Report of
the Widdicombe Committee of Inquiry into the Conduct of Local
Authority Business, published in June, 1986, on which the
Secretary of State for the Environment has invited interested
bodies, including local authorities, to comment by the end of the
year.
2. The Report is a wide-ranging document with no fewer than 88
recommendations on such subjects as the place of local
authorities in the unitary state, the political process by which
decisions are reached, the roles of councillors and officers and
their relationship, the interests of the public and boundaries of
discretion. In considering the document, the Committee felt it
important to examine the Report as a whole and to appreciate the
broad thrust of the conclusions drawn, rather than concentrate on
the individual recommendations and choose from among them the
concepts which might be adopted for use in Hampshire.
3. The Committee felt that in its analysis of local government's
position and attributes, and the threats to its existence, as
well as the clear faith in the need for it to remain an essential
part of the political process in the country, the Report was to
be welcomed. They found it encouraging that the Committee of
Inquiry recognised the wide role of local authorities, in
contrast to the narrow definition contained in the recent Green
Paper "Paying for Local Government".
4. The Committee agreed with the view expressed in the Report that
the decision making process should be designed to reflect the
party political nature of local authorities. They supported the
conclusion that the existing system whereby Councils are
corporate bodies, taking decisions openly, either directly or
through a committee system, with an officer corps serving the
Council as a whole, is best suited to local government. They did
not consider the "Westminster" model, where the Civil Service
serve only the Government of the day, appropriate for local
government.
5. The Committee were firmly of the belief that all committees and
sub-committees with decision making powers should be composed in
such a way as to reflect in strict proportion the political
composition of the Council but they did not feel that this should
be brought about by legislation but rather by the acceptance of
good practice by local authorities. So far as co-opted members
were concerned, the view was taken that they should not have
voting rights. The Committee believed that the Hampshire County
Council policy, whereby information was fully open to the press
and public unless there were specific, stated reasons for
confidentiality, should be pursued. They considered it essential
that major decisions should be taken by members in Committee.
6. Proposals in the report that there should be statutory provisions
to secure written conventions to determine the working
relationship between political parties and between members and
officers, and that the law should give a Chief Executive the role
of arbiter in this area, did not find favour. In particular,
they were concerned that the all important relationship of trust
between Chief Executive and members would be jeopardised by
giving him specific statutory duties.
7. A major part of the Report concentrates on the role of
councillors. It reiterates the overriding principle governing
their role, i.e. that they must act within the law and cannot
claim a mandate to act outside powers granted or controls imposed
by Parliament. The Report does not deny the right of local
authorities to campaign for changes in the law but stresses that
they must always act within the law. Changes are proposed in the
National Code of Local Government Conduct to include this
principle and to state that sectional loyalties as well as
private gain may create conflicts with public duty. It proposes
giving the code a statutory base, with breaches of the code being
regarded as maladministration. The Committee support the
proposition of changes to the National Code but did not consider
statutory backing was required and considered that since the code
is designed for local government, it would be preferable for it
to be reviewed through the Local Authority Associations. They
felt that the provisions of any revised National Code should
apply equally to members and officers.
8. The Report considers the question of whether officers employed by
one Council should be able to serve as members of another. The
Committee agreed with the conclusion reached in the Report, that
to be able to do so would be inappropriate for employees of
principal officer rank or above, for whom a conflict of duty
could arise.
9. The Report proposes that the current system of remuneration of
councillors, through attendance allowance or financial loss
allowance, should be replaced by a flat rate allowance paid as an
annual sum to all councillors. All the evidence collected
suggests that the present remuneration system is unsatisfactory
and fails to recompense councillors adequately. The Committee
did not agree that a flat rate allowance was appropriate because
it had no regard to the very different amounts of time devoted by
individual members to Council work. Nonetheless, they felt that
there was a need to review the system to see if a fairer method
of remuneration could be found. In particular, they considered
that levels of reimbursement should be revised regularly to
reflect inflation, and that people not in employment should not
lose welfare benefits as a result of being a councillor.
10. The Committee expressed regret that private sector employers were
often reluctant to assist staff to serve the public as
councillors, and they would like to see the conventions of the
public sector extended to the private sector. Whilst they
acknowledged that it might be reasonable for an employer to
recover part of the allowance paid to an employee, they felt it
should be recognised that there will always be costs incurred by
members which are not effectively recompensed. They were
strongly of the opinion that more training should be provided for
councillors.
11. In discussing the proposed strengthening of a citizen's power of
challenge through audit, etc., the Committee agreed that the
public should have direct access to the Ombudsman. They did not
consider, however, that the Ombudsman should have the power to
investigate matters on his own initiative without a complaint
from a member of the public.
12. The Committee felt that when considered as a whole, the
Widdicombe Report appears as a welcome contribution to the
strengthening of the local democratic process. The general
thrust of its recommendations, aimed as they are at providing
ground-rules to emphasise the best of existing practice in local
government should, if applied judiciously, enhance the
effectiveness of local authorities in their widest roles. They
believed, however, that it would not serve the purpose of the
Report to act precipitately in the implementation of any of its
recommendations and that an effective contribution to the
national debate could best be made through the Association of
County Councils.
13. A report of the County Chief Executive, summarising and
commenting upon proposals in the Widdicombe Report, was
considered by the Committee in reaching the following
recommendations and a copy has been placed in the Members' Room.
RECOMMENDATION:
14. That the Council:
(a) Welcome the Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the
Conduct of Local Authority Business (Cmnd 9797) as an
important contribution to the strengthening of the local
democratic process;
(b) Support the general thrust of the recommendations made by
the Committee of Inquiry but consider that in many areas
specific legislation would not be necessary to achieve the
aims which could be better accomplished by the clear
definition of good practice supported, where appropriate, by
defined Codes of Practice agreed by the Local Authority
Associations;
(c) Believe, in particular, that it would be unwise to give
statutory backing to the position and duties of the Chief
Executive of a local authority, since the relationship
between Officers and Members must be based on mutual trust
which cannot be enforced through statute;
(d) Are of the view that a comprehensive review of the means by
which the public is able to challenge the decisions of local
authorities, government departments, and other public bodies
should be undertaken, rather than dealing with local
authorities in isolation.
15. That the views of the Council be forwarded to the Association of
County Councils, the Department of the Environment and Hampshire
Members of Parliament.
7/P/690/1/87
This page has been taken from HANTSNET - Hampshire County Council's Information Network.
Top of this page
Hantsweb Homepage
Top of this page
Hantsweb Homepage