BOROUGH OF KETTERING

OVERVIEW COMMITTEE

Meeting held – 2nd November 2004 

Present:		Councillor Bayes (Deputy Chair, in the Chair),
Councillors, Adams, Gordon, Hales, L.Henson, 
Hollobone, Jones, and Wiley.

Also Present:		Councillor Corazzo and Padwick.

04.OV.10	APOLOGIES

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Smith-Haynes (Chair of the Committee), Councillor M. Evans and Councillor Whyte.

Councillors Adams and Hollobone were substitutes for Councillors Whyte and M. Evans respectively.

04.OV.11	MINUTES

RESOLVED	that 	the minutes of the meeting held on 8th September 2004, be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

04.OV.12	DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

		None.

04.OV.13	PUBLIC SPEAKERS		

Mr David Watson, Chair of Geddington, Newton and Little Oakley Parish Council, indicated that he wished to speak on item A1 , Periodic Electoral Review.

04.OV.14	PERIODIC ELECTORAL REVIEW (A1)

Prior to consideration of the report on this matter, Councillor David Watson, Chair of the Geddington, Newton and Little Oakley Parish Council addressed the Committee in respect of the Draft Submission produced by the Task and Finish Group. Firstly, however, a letter from his Council to the Task and Finish Group in response to the latest consultation in respect of the matter, was read to the Committee.

Mr Watson expressed his opposition to the Task and Finish Group’s proposals for the Borough particularly as they related to Geddington, Newton and Little Oakley. He said that Geddington was a small community that linked into the electoral process for both Borough and Parish Council elections. He felt the proposals would adversely affect community engagement, and that it would be difficult for the electorate to engage with Councillors in a larger electoral area.

Councillor Padwick was also in attendance at the meeting and addressed the Committee in respect of this issue. He challenged the quality and amount of consultation undertaken in respect of this matter by the Task and Finish Group, which he felt did not meet the Council’s agreed principles. He noted that Geddington had high turn-outs for both Borough and Parish elections, and felt that this could be compromised if the proposals of the Group came into force. He suggested that turnout was high in rural areas that had single member Wards, and that there was a risk of it falling if the proposal for a two member ward was agreed.  He also felt that the proposals did not reflect a natural community as far as Geddington was concerned, and that it would be lost within such a large electoral area. He requested that the Task and Finish Group looked again at the Draft Submission. 

Councillor Jones, the Chair of the Task and Finish Group, presented its report to the Committee. She detailed the approach and processes undertaken by the Group and the criteria under which it had to proceed. She made particular reference to the Consultation processes, and emphasised that the Council was a consultee of the Boundary Committee for England (BCE) in respect of the review. The outcome of the Task and Finish Group’s work that was reflected in the Draft Submission was that the Borough Council should have 37 members representing 17 wards, with 1 single member ward, 12 two member wards and 4 three member wards. Details of future stages of the review were also submitted.

In response to the speakers, Councillor Jones pointed out that three letters had been sent to Parish Councils concerning the Review, and that responses had been received from some consultees, including a number of Parish Councils. The Rural Forum had also received a report on the matter. It was acknowledged that the timetable was tight in respect of this issue, but it was the BCE’s timetable that the Council had to work within. The Rural areas had been treated seriously, and were represented on the Task and Finish Group. It was emphasised that community identity had been closely examined by the Group. It should be noted that there was a need to achieve equality of representation across the Borough as far as possible, and that this was a major consideration of the Group when reaching its decisions. The proposals contained in the Draft Submission represented an improvement in equality of representation. It was also noted that the views of the Rural Forum had been taken into account when reaching a decision on the rural areas. Members were also informed that the Group had not been able to consider any part of the proposed Milton Keynes/South Midlands development, as work on this  would not be commenced until after 2008, the deadline for projected figures for this review. 

Members were further appraised of the rationale for the naming of some of the proposed Wards and their inclusion in either the defined Inner or Outer Kettering community areas. 

Members of the Committee considered the possible removal of the Parish of Ashley from the proposed Rural East Ward to be included in the proposed Rural West Ward in the Draft Submission. It was felt that the Parish was more aligned with those contained in the West Ward, and  such a move would improve equality of representation.

It was noted that the boundary of Weekley Glebe playing fields shown on the submitted plan, needed to be adjusted.

A further meeting of the Task and Finish Group would be held prior to the Council meeting that would consider the Council’s Draft Submission. The Group would consider responses to the consultation document, and make final adjustments to the document. Additionally, members considered the future of the Task and Finish Group when this particular phase of its work was completed.

It was noted that the Labour Group had registered their dissent to the content of the Draft Submission, and could not support it.

	RESOLVED		that :-

i)	the amendments, as detailed above, to the Draft Submission, be referred to the Task and Finish Group for further action; and
ii)	the Task and Finish Group be suspended from 28th November 2004, until such time as it needs to re-convene to consider the Boundary Committee for England’s Draft Recommendations on the Periodic Electoral Review of Kettering Borough.

04.OV.15	CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION (A2)

A report was submitted that requested members to consider changes to the Council’s Constitution. The changes to be considered came from a variety of sources, such as the Ethical Governance Audit completed in 2003, outside organisations such as the Audit Commission, the Council’s Standards Committee, and the continuing evolution of the Council’s decision-making and scrutiny processes.

The suggested changes and the comments of the Overview Committee would be considered by the Council’s Executive in November 2004, and finally by full Council in December 2004.

It was noted that many of the changes, particularly to Rules elements of the documents had occurred as a result of best practice guidance, and changes to legislation.

Members welcomed opportunities for training on the proposed new arrangements, particularly with regard to Responsibility for Functions.

A list of specific comments in respect of this item is attached at Appendix ‘A’ to these minutes, otherwise the suggested amendment were agreed.

Having considered the submitted report, it 

                                            RESOLVED        

 that the Overview Committee recommends the Constitution as amended to the Council’s Executive.	

(For the motion 4, Against 0, Not Voting 3)

(NB: Councillor Hales left the meeting at 8:30pm, during consideration of the above item)

04.OV.16	OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY WORK PROGRAMME(A3)

Members received the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme for consideration.

It was noted that, subject to the agreement of the full Council in December 2004, this would be the final meeting of the Committee. The allocation of any outstanding items, would be dealt with in consultation with the Chairs of the remaining scrutiny committees, and the terms of reference of those Committees would be amended to reflect this.

The allocation of future work could be dealt with by arranging regular meetings of the Chairs of the remaining scrutiny committees.

It was further noted that item A04/009 in respect of the second interim report of the Task and Finish Group for the Best Value Review of Culture, Leisure and Sport, would be considered by the Policy and Improvement Committee.

04.OV.17	FINAL MEETING

Members noted that this was likely to be the final meeting of the Overview Committee, and expressed the view that they looked forward to working under the new scrutiny arrangements, subject to their ratification by Council. 

Members thanked the officers for their support at meetings of the Committee.

The Chair was thanked in her absence for her work on behalf of the Committee,

                        (The meeting started at 7:00pm and ended at  9:20pm)

Signed_____________________________________________

						Chair

APPENDIX ‘A’
OVERVIEW COMMITTEE
02.11.04

CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION
OVERVIEW COMMITTEE – 2nd NOVEMBER 2004	
REFERENCE	DECISION	
General	Change the title ‘Chief Financial Officer’ to ‘Responsible Financial Officer’ throughout the documents.	
APPENDIX A	Changes to Constitution	
B7 4.02 (f)	HDLS to re-draft for clarity	
B9 5.02	HDLS to bring to the attention of incoming Mayors/Deputy Mayors and their Political Groups. 
This amendment would not apply to Mayoress/Deputy Mayoress or Consort.	
B15  9.02
E2  2	Members did not agree to the Executive being appointed on a politically proportionate basis. (For 4, Against 0, Not Voting 3)	
B23 13.09	Recent amendments need to be considered to the Rules, which will be referred to members at the Council meeting in December 2004.
Agreed to provide members with an individual mail out of the amended rules.	
D1 1.3	Agreed, subject to a time being specified before submission to Council. Consequent alterations through the Council procedure Rules.	
D6-D7 4/5	Amendment agreed. (For 4, Against 0, Not Voting 3) Add another Council meeting into the schedule of meetings.	
D8  7.05	Add ‘ or Committee Administrator in his absence’.	
H. H1  2	Amendment agreed. (For 4, Against 0, Not Voting 3)	
Part 7   W21	Agree to deletion of Mawsley Liason Forum	
APPENDIX B	Standards Committee Hearing Procedure Rules	
Whole document	To be considered by Council in December 2004, along with recent amendments ( see B23 13.09 above)	
APPENDIX C	Responsibility for Functions	
Head of Development
Control	Members expressed their wish for Council to consider an amendment to a) to include the facility for members from adjacent Wards being able to request items being referred to Committee.	
APPENDIX D	Financial Regulations	
Whole Document	Ensure whole of Constitution is amended to reflect the change in title to ‘Responsible Finance Officer’	
APPENDIX E	CONTRACT PROCEDURE RULES	
Whole Document	Ensure that details of who authorised officers are, is included.
Ensure cross-referencing takes place.	
APPENDIX F	BUDGET AND POLICY FRAMEWORK PROCEDURE RULES	
Whole Document	Needs to be amended throughout if Overview Committee is deleted from Constitution.