The meeting is now available on archive.
For the record, the written version of the 'presentation' which included the 39 WLGA recommendations, and the watered down recommendations of the Cross-Party Constitutional Review Working Group (CRWG) finally appeared online at 10 am, as the meeting started.
This gave no one any idea of what was going to be discussed, nor any time for Members to gather any thoughts from their constituents. A poor start.
I don't think I need to remind anyone how this all came about, my most recent post here, gives the main background.
The outcome of the meeting was, in the end, much has previously been predicted on this blog. The aim, which was to be the 'most open and transparent council in Wales' was not met.
In a 'blink and you'll miss it' moment, the most important element, the 'change of culture' was dealt with very briefly in the introduction from the Chair of the CRWG, Cllr Terry Davies (Lab). Apparently, it had already happened. Must have passed me by...
Anyway, I am not entirely critical, some positive steps have been taken which may make useful headlines; Executive Board meeting will now be webcast and the Register of Members' Interest will be published online (as now required). An online petition service will soon appear on the website and at last, Councillors will now be allowed to ask supplementary questions in full council.
As predicted, the requirement for eight Members to sign a Motion on Notice has been dropped to the normal two. (This was always a silly idea) and Motions will now have to go to full council rather than be quietly kicked off to the Executive Board Members. well, in theory anyway as it should be remembered that it is the chief executive who sets the agenda...
As for Executive Board Member meetings, the agendas will now be published before, rather than after the meeting and backbench councillors will be allowed to attend as long as there are no exempt items and any three councillors will now be able to call-in Executive decisions.
These little steps are to be welcomed of course but they are not radical. They merely bring the council a small step closer to where they are supposed to be in the 21st Century, and are largely the inevitable reversal of the extreme measures brought in by Mark James to stifle debate.
The WLGA recommended that the public should be allowed to ask questions at Exec Board and Scrutiny meetings and for a time slot be allocated.
This was a bit too much so it was agreed that only public questions on Notice should be included. Cllr Darren Price remarked that the complexities of the constitution made this a difficult procedure for the public, or anyone, so needed further review.
The shadowy Business Management Group (no agenda, no minutes) has been shelved and and constitutional issues will now be dealt with by the CRWG which will remain as a group and sit a couple of times a year.
Hopefully, their agendas and minutes will be published from now on, unlike the last twelve meetings.
Membership of the CRWG does not include, however, unaffiliated Members. That needs to change.
The press and media protocol was approved at last week's meeting, I've made my view quite clear on that already. It has to do with leopards and spots.
One recommendation was for Members to be encouraged and trained to use social media, to improve public engagement.
At this point Cllr Peter Hughes Griffiths chipped in and said that disappointingly only 18 members turned up to the training session but after listening to the officers he was even more wary of using it than he had before, not only could things 'not be removed' but the whole business was downright "DANGEROUS"
So, after that little speech I doubt if there'll be an increase in the pitifully low number of tweeting councillors.
The complacency I referred to earlier meant that no change would be made to the format and content of Minutes and sufficient guidance existed to deal with declarations of interest. Ms Rees Jones was drawing up further guidance on the reasons for exempting reports...or just further reasons maybe.
As for Minutes, Cllr Anthony Jones did wondered whether councillors who contributed to discussion could be named...and Calum Higgins suggested that each meeting could be audio recorded, presumably for accuracy in the Minutes. Further reviews were promised, or rather mumbled.
The collection of names for those attending the public gallery is here to stay. This was for 'Fire Safety' reasons, apparently. The fact remains that there were no concerns over fire safety prior to June 2011...at least children won't be forced to sign illegal 'undertakings' any more.
The desire to identify and monitor observers in the Gallery is here to stay.
Which brings us on to the subject of allowing the public to film meetings, (for those interested, this can be seen from 1:19:46 into the meeting) The CRWG recommended, contrary to the WLGA, that the public could only film meeting which were already webcast.
To be fair the Plaid contingent recognised that this was an important principle and that the CRWG recommendation was a bit pointless, Cllr Dole stated that this decision, within the group, had not been unanimous.
Cllr Alun Lenny remarked that it was this kind of 'control freakery' which had got them to where they were today. He said that if they didn't allow the public to film all open meetings they were falling short of their transparency aim as other councils had managed to bring it in..
True to their original Motion back in 2012 and indeed recent legislation in England, Plaid put forward an amendment for the public to film all open meetings.
As you can imagine there were the usual objections, people might fall from the public gallery as they tried to film, and content might be 'edited', unlike the press or BBC who never edit anything I suppose... Cllr Terry Davies, the chair of this 'transparency' group was very concerned about how things "can happen on Twitter...and who knows what we could have...and that's the reason behind it".
Disappointingly the amendment was lost by 23 vote to 33 so I'm not certain if all the Plaid Members voted for it. Their coalition 'partners' certainly didn't..
So the upshot of all that is that the public can only film meetings which the council are already webcasting. Unbelievable.
There was some discussion over the timing of meetings. The WLGA had suggested a survey of Members to see if times, which are never in the late afternoon or evening, could be changed to encourage a wider variety of people to stand for council, younger people, working folk, etc something the Welsh Government is particularly keen on.
A survey took place and 44 out of 74 councillors responded. Most of the 44 wanted the times to remain as they were. Despite several councillors saying at the meeting that they didn't agree with this, as the survey had been 'democratic' the status quo would remain for now.
Veteran councillor Tom Theophilus piped up as he was worried about having to drive through the snow in Winter to get to his evening meals. He eventually corrected himself to 'evening meetings'...Good to know councillors have our interests at heart...
One of the recommendations put forward by the WLGA was for all councillors to be given copies of exempt reports. This enabled efficient scrutiny and the possibility of call-in. The CRWG decided that only leaders, opposition leaders and scrutiny chairs should be supplied with copies.
An interesting discussion ensued, kicked off by Cllr Darren Price. He claimed that he was shocked to have seen 'leaked' details of last week's exempt report on the link road funding on a 'local blog' a few hours after the meeting...and for this reason he was going to agree that the release of exempt reports should be confined to those recommended by the CRWG, and not all councillors.
Other councillors chimed in and Kevin Madge wittered on that 'things had appeared on websites' and had prevented investors investing in the county, "developers run away" he said.
Quite an extraordinary claim and I wonder exactly what evidence he has of that...
Cllr Anthony Jones demanded an investigation, ombudsman style, over the matter of the leak.
I'm not sure what 'local blog' Cllr Price was referring to but it could possibly have been this one. Last week I published an update to the news on the link road, it was after the council issued a press release on the decision.
The only difference was that I included the (bare) figures and the fact they were borrowing over £3m. This was undoubtedly in the public interest and should have been disclosed by the council themselves in the press release.
I presume that it was potential criticism or embarrassment over borrowing money for this project, given the current financial constraints, that they'd been trying to avoid...
As for 'leaks', it goes with the territory. As for sources, I suggest they concentrate their 'outrage' on the plural rather than the singular, and not confine it just to councillors either...
The meeting drew to a close and, in terms of stage management, it had been a success. The Constitution will be "tweaked" by Linda Rees Jones in time for the September meeting. Cllr Peter Hughes Griffiths thanked everyone, and they all shot off for lunch at 12.30.
Although this meeting had been the result of a cross-party group, I thought that the new Plaid leadership would seize the moment to express their intention for real change but they didn't. In the event they seemed tense and uneasy. At least Peter Hughes Griffiths remembered to mention that it was an important meeting.
My overall impression was that little will change...and it never will whilst those responsible for creating and sustaining the toxic culture remain.
For the record, the written version of the 'presentation' which included the 39 WLGA recommendations, and the watered down recommendations of the Cross-Party Constitutional Review Working Group (CRWG) finally appeared online at 10 am, as the meeting started.
This gave no one any idea of what was going to be discussed, nor any time for Members to gather any thoughts from their constituents. A poor start.
I don't think I need to remind anyone how this all came about, my most recent post here, gives the main background.
The outcome of the meeting was, in the end, much has previously been predicted on this blog. The aim, which was to be the 'most open and transparent council in Wales' was not met.
In a 'blink and you'll miss it' moment, the most important element, the 'change of culture' was dealt with very briefly in the introduction from the Chair of the CRWG, Cllr Terry Davies (Lab). Apparently, it had already happened. Must have passed me by...
Anyway, I am not entirely critical, some positive steps have been taken which may make useful headlines; Executive Board meeting will now be webcast and the Register of Members' Interest will be published online (as now required). An online petition service will soon appear on the website and at last, Councillors will now be allowed to ask supplementary questions in full council.
As predicted, the requirement for eight Members to sign a Motion on Notice has been dropped to the normal two. (This was always a silly idea) and Motions will now have to go to full council rather than be quietly kicked off to the Executive Board Members. well, in theory anyway as it should be remembered that it is the chief executive who sets the agenda...
As for Executive Board Member meetings, the agendas will now be published before, rather than after the meeting and backbench councillors will be allowed to attend as long as there are no exempt items and any three councillors will now be able to call-in Executive decisions.
These little steps are to be welcomed of course but they are not radical. They merely bring the council a small step closer to where they are supposed to be in the 21st Century, and are largely the inevitable reversal of the extreme measures brought in by Mark James to stifle debate.
The WLGA recommended that the public should be allowed to ask questions at Exec Board and Scrutiny meetings and for a time slot be allocated.
This was a bit too much so it was agreed that only public questions on Notice should be included. Cllr Darren Price remarked that the complexities of the constitution made this a difficult procedure for the public, or anyone, so needed further review.
The shadowy Business Management Group (no agenda, no minutes) has been shelved and and constitutional issues will now be dealt with by the CRWG which will remain as a group and sit a couple of times a year.
Hopefully, their agendas and minutes will be published from now on, unlike the last twelve meetings.
Membership of the CRWG does not include, however, unaffiliated Members. That needs to change.
The press and media protocol was approved at last week's meeting, I've made my view quite clear on that already. It has to do with leopards and spots.
One recommendation was for Members to be encouraged and trained to use social media, to improve public engagement.
At this point Cllr Peter Hughes Griffiths chipped in and said that disappointingly only 18 members turned up to the training session but after listening to the officers he was even more wary of using it than he had before, not only could things 'not be removed' but the whole business was downright "DANGEROUS"
So, after that little speech I doubt if there'll be an increase in the pitifully low number of tweeting councillors.
The complacency I referred to earlier meant that no change would be made to the format and content of Minutes and sufficient guidance existed to deal with declarations of interest. Ms Rees Jones was drawing up further guidance on the reasons for exempting reports...or just further reasons maybe.
As for Minutes, Cllr Anthony Jones did wondered whether councillors who contributed to discussion could be named...and Calum Higgins suggested that each meeting could be audio recorded, presumably for accuracy in the Minutes. Further reviews were promised, or rather mumbled.
The collection of names for those attending the public gallery is here to stay. This was for 'Fire Safety' reasons, apparently. The fact remains that there were no concerns over fire safety prior to June 2011...at least children won't be forced to sign illegal 'undertakings' any more.
The desire to identify and monitor observers in the Gallery is here to stay.
Which brings us on to the subject of allowing the public to film meetings, (for those interested, this can be seen from 1:19:46 into the meeting) The CRWG recommended, contrary to the WLGA, that the public could only film meeting which were already webcast.
To be fair the Plaid contingent recognised that this was an important principle and that the CRWG recommendation was a bit pointless, Cllr Dole stated that this decision, within the group, had not been unanimous.
Cllr Alun Lenny remarked that it was this kind of 'control freakery' which had got them to where they were today. He said that if they didn't allow the public to film all open meetings they were falling short of their transparency aim as other councils had managed to bring it in..
True to their original Motion back in 2012 and indeed recent legislation in England, Plaid put forward an amendment for the public to film all open meetings.
As you can imagine there were the usual objections, people might fall from the public gallery as they tried to film, and content might be 'edited', unlike the press or BBC who never edit anything I suppose... Cllr Terry Davies, the chair of this 'transparency' group was very concerned about how things "can happen on Twitter...and who knows what we could have...and that's the reason behind it".
Disappointingly the amendment was lost by 23 vote to 33 so I'm not certain if all the Plaid Members voted for it. Their coalition 'partners' certainly didn't..
So the upshot of all that is that the public can only film meetings which the council are already webcasting. Unbelievable.
There was some discussion over the timing of meetings. The WLGA had suggested a survey of Members to see if times, which are never in the late afternoon or evening, could be changed to encourage a wider variety of people to stand for council, younger people, working folk, etc something the Welsh Government is particularly keen on.
A survey took place and 44 out of 74 councillors responded. Most of the 44 wanted the times to remain as they were. Despite several councillors saying at the meeting that they didn't agree with this, as the survey had been 'democratic' the status quo would remain for now.
Veteran councillor Tom Theophilus piped up as he was worried about having to drive through the snow in Winter to get to his evening meals. He eventually corrected himself to 'evening meetings'...Good to know councillors have our interests at heart...
One of the recommendations put forward by the WLGA was for all councillors to be given copies of exempt reports. This enabled efficient scrutiny and the possibility of call-in. The CRWG decided that only leaders, opposition leaders and scrutiny chairs should be supplied with copies.
An interesting discussion ensued, kicked off by Cllr Darren Price. He claimed that he was shocked to have seen 'leaked' details of last week's exempt report on the link road funding on a 'local blog' a few hours after the meeting...and for this reason he was going to agree that the release of exempt reports should be confined to those recommended by the CRWG, and not all councillors.
Other councillors chimed in and Kevin Madge wittered on that 'things had appeared on websites' and had prevented investors investing in the county, "developers run away" he said.
Quite an extraordinary claim and I wonder exactly what evidence he has of that...
Cllr Anthony Jones demanded an investigation, ombudsman style, over the matter of the leak.
I'm not sure what 'local blog' Cllr Price was referring to but it could possibly have been this one. Last week I published an update to the news on the link road, it was after the council issued a press release on the decision.
The only difference was that I included the (bare) figures and the fact they were borrowing over £3m. This was undoubtedly in the public interest and should have been disclosed by the council themselves in the press release.
I presume that it was potential criticism or embarrassment over borrowing money for this project, given the current financial constraints, that they'd been trying to avoid...
As for 'leaks', it goes with the territory. As for sources, I suggest they concentrate their 'outrage' on the plural rather than the singular, and not confine it just to councillors either...
The meeting drew to a close and, in terms of stage management, it had been a success. The Constitution will be "tweaked" by Linda Rees Jones in time for the September meeting. Cllr Peter Hughes Griffiths thanked everyone, and they all shot off for lunch at 12.30.
Although this meeting had been the result of a cross-party group, I thought that the new Plaid leadership would seize the moment to express their intention for real change but they didn't. In the event they seemed tense and uneasy. At least Peter Hughes Griffiths remembered to mention that it was an important meeting.
My overall impression was that little will change...and it never will whilst those responsible for creating and sustaining the toxic culture remain.