Fury as council ‘decision meetings’ to go (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Fury as council ‘decision meetings’ to go
9:18am Wednesday 8th February 2012 in News
Conservative leader Ian Gillies
YORK’S council bosses have been accused of “secrecy” over decision-making after revealing plans to axe a string of meetings which are open to the public.
City of York Council is set to abolish “decision sessions” for cabinet members, with leading councillors instead dealing with some of the authority’s business in “routine meetings” with officials.
The authority said it would save officers’ time and up to £5,000 in printing costs, while issues of “substantial interest” could be discussed by the full cabinet or at specially-arranged meetings.
However, it admitted the move could spark criticism of “behind-closed-doors decision-making”.
Opposition parties claim the arrangements will be “a blow for local democracy”, with the ruling Labour group saying they are part of moves to cut bureaucracy which will also see two committees merged and the ditching of two groups and council “champions”.
A report by Andy Docherty, the authority’s assistant director for governance, said decision sessions were “unusual and possibly unique to York” and “time-consuming”, adding proposals for cabinet members to study and their decisions would remain publicly available.
Conservative leader Ian Gillies said: “It is promoting secrecy and preventing opposition parties and the public from commenting on cabinet proposals and having the chance to have some influence before decisions are made.
“These changes would leave it entirely to the discretion of the council leader or his cabinet members to decide what is relevant and important to residents and whether they would deign to meet in public rather than behind closed doors.”
Green leader Andy D’Agorne said axing decision sessions would prevent “public personal representations” to cabinet members, while Coun Carol Runciman, who leads the Liberal Democrats, branded the move “disgraceful”.
She said: “This cabinet seem determined to sideline opposition councillors and keep residents in the dark.”
Council leader James Alexander said the changes would “reduce the financial burden of council bureaucracy to the taxpayer” and allow more funding for scrutiny of the authority’s activities, making it “more accountable, not less”.
“The Conservatives published a manifesto before last year’s local elections where they said they agreed with the principle of amalgamating committees and reducing councillors’ special responsibility allowances, and that is exactly what we are doing,” he said.
Best in the open
NOBODY said public sector cuts would be easy, but accountability in local government must remain sacrosanct.
It is worrying that City of York Council is thinking about abolishing decision sessions, which are open to the public, in favour of behind-closed-doors routine meetings.
The authority says it would save time and money, and although we don’t object to efficiency measures, if the cost to the taxpayer is transparency, then we mind very much.
It’s not so much a case of what will happen as what might. Take the Clifton Green/Water End Junction or the community stadium. Both sparked debate in decision sessions, but what if such issues were consigned to routine meetings?
The proposed changes would leave it to the council leader or cabinet members to decide what is important enough to be debated in public and that poses a real risk to local democracy.
Before any such measures are implemented, we need to be reassured that the decision making process will not be compromised.
Comments(7)
pedalling paul
says...
9:42am Wed 8 Feb 12
http://democracy.yor
k.gov.uk/mgCalendarM
onthView.aspx?GL=1&b
cr=1 this Officer's Report will be considered by the Audit and Governance Committee meeting of Feb 13th. agenda item 13.
All Council depts have been asked to examine cost cutting options and this is one outcome.
The Officer's Report further notes that "It is recognised that there are some decisions which do attract
public interest. Cabinet members or the Leader may well
decide that issues which have attracted substantial interest
should be determined by the full Cabinet rather than through
an individual decision session. Alternatively, Cabinet
Page 173 Agenda Item 13
members will retain discretion to ask for a public decision
making meeting to be organised."
So if the Report's recommendation is accepted, there MAY still be scope for public participation. I believe that this must be enshrined in the Constitution, so that registration to speak at these meetings must still be offered, and that a public decision session will automatically be held if someone registers.
smudge1
says...
9:51am Wed 8 Feb 12
pedalling paul wrote:That's made it very clear then Paul !!!
According to the Council meetings Calendar at http://democracy.yor k.gov.uk/mgCalendarM onthView.aspx?GL=1&a
mp;b cr=1 this Officer's Report will be considered by the Audit and Governance Committee meeting of Feb 13th. agenda item 13. All Council depts have been asked to examine cost cutting options and this is one outcome. The Officer's Report further notes that "It is recognised that there are some decisions which do attract public interest. Cabinet members or the Leader may well decide that issues which have attracted substantial interest should be determined by the full Cabinet rather than through an individual decision session. Alternatively, Cabinet Page 173 Agenda Item 13 members will retain discretion to ask for a public decision making meeting to be organised." So if the Report's recommendation is accepted, there MAY still be scope for public participation. I believe that this must be enshrined in the Constitution, so that registration to speak at these meetings must still be offered, and that a public decision session will automatically be held if someone registers.
old_geezer
says...
11:37am Wed 8 Feb 12
Obviously there were delegated responsibilities, but these items were still on committee agendas. Items could be confidential, but whoever decided that had to be prepared to justify it; with contending political parties, unjustified secrecy would always be hazardous for any tempted to abuse it.
thefutureis
says...
2:28pm Wed 8 Feb 12
TheTruthHurts
says...
3:31pm Wed 8 Feb 12
thefutureis wrote:All two of them? One of which is crumbling.
Lets look at what the public might miss? At the last Leisure decision session the Cabinet Member decided to "sell" all of Yorks swimming pools to the highest bidder. Under the new arrangements that would be done in secret in a room with just her and 1 officer present
LibDem
says...
5:24pm Wed 8 Feb 12
There are a whole range of controversial issues, like Water End and other traffic schemes, that would not get any resident input in future.
A revealing list can be found on the LibDem web site http://www.libdemyor
k.co.uk.
osbaldwicklane says...
9:25am Wed 8 Feb 12
The question is , What,s Alexander got to hide .