Agenda item

Notices of Motion

Notice of Motion’s shall be referred to the appropriate Committee meeting. The mover of the motion can outline the proposal and then it will stand adjourned. The motion may be debated to assist debate later if agreed by two-thirds of Council Members.

Notice of Motion 1

The following motion on the Constitution has been presented by Cllr Swain and supported by Cllrs Dewhirst, G Hook, J Hook, Keeling, Nutley and Wrigley – background information attached.

At the last council meeting this council affirmed the constitution as set out on our website. It was suggested that there were material changes in the document when compared to the previous version, and in some cases there are.

There are 2 points where clear material changes have occurred and these should be reversed.

4.3.2(e): Previously the public could ask questions relevant to “the business of the council”. This has been changed to “the business of the meeting”. This is a significant material change.

Section 6, Schedule 2 row 2B3: Group Leaders never had the power to veto a change to the constitution because they didn’t like it, however wording has been removed “If group leaders agree a change is minor, It can be done by democratic services manager” The power is lost, for a Group leader to insist that a change is major if others claim it is minor.

In tidying up the constitution, it was not been modified to use gender neutral language throughout. We should replace references to chairman with chair, and he/his with they/their. These are simple changes that encourage wider participation in democracy, and there is no justification for not making them.

I propose that the monitoring officer be asked to produce a form of words that restores the meaning of these two paragraphs and substitutes gender neutral language throughout. The revisions be approved by Full Council.

Notice of Motion 2

The following motion on Moving with the times - 21st Century Councils meeting virtually has been presented by the Leader and supported by Cllrs Dewhirst, Evans, G Hook, J Hook, Keeling, Nuttall

The temporary enabling of virtual council meetings in response to the coronavirus pandemic allowed the council to continue making democratic decisions efficiently, transparently and safely without the need for physical meetings in one place. We welcomed the return to in-person meetings where they can safely and efficiently take place, but also recognise the benefits to democracy of providing flexible meeting options, including opening up local democratic decision-making and creating a more accessible experience for councillors and the public.

The council notes in particular the following advantages of being able to hold remote and hybrid council meetings:

1) Some councillors and prospective councillors have work or caring commitments, or mobility or accessibility issues limiting their ability to attend meetings in person. Virtual meeting options provide more flexibility and accessibility for councillors to attend council meetings. In the future, this flexibility and increased accessibility could help to attract a wider range of potential councillors.

2) Many councillors have to travel a long distance from their homes to the council meeting place. This can make it more difficult for councillors to attend every meeting they would wish to attend. In addition, long travel time for short meetings may not be the most efficient use of councillor time; remote attendance on occasion may help maintain high levels of councillor attendance and be more efficient.

3) This council acknowledges the challenges around climate change. For example, a reduction in unnecessary travel by attending some meetings virtually rather than driving would reduce emissions and cut down on the council’s carbon footprint.

4) Virtual meetings can save money for the council in terms of travel expenses and venue costs.

5) Some councillors are also councillors for other councils in the area, and virtual meetings options can help them attend more meetings, even meetings taking place on the same day. This increases engagement in the various tiers of government, which is an advantage for this council and others affected.

6) Providing virtual meeting options can make council meetings more accessible and produce better engagement from the public and the press on various issues. For example, reporting of council business increased when meetings were held virtually compared to when council meetings must be attended in person by journalists and members of the public.

This council would like to have the flexibility to hold virtual, hybrid and in-person meetings to suit the local context and needs of residents and councillors.

This council resolves to:

1) Write to the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) urging a permanent amendment to the meeting rules set out in the Local Government Act 1972 be enabling local authorities to hold virtual, hybrid or physical meetings

2) Write to the Members of Parliament serving Teignbridge to ask for support for this flexible approach to council meetings.

3) Continue to explore the use of technology to develop online meetings to attract a wider audience once our request has been successful.

Notice of Motion 3

The following motion of no confidence in the Leader of the Council has been presented by Cllr Macgregor and supported by Cllrs Bradford, Daws, Eden, Mullone and Patch.

That this council has no confidence in current leader Cllr Connett and seeks a change in leadership. The reputation, not only of the elected representatives of Teignbridge, but also of the officers and staff of the council is at stake. Failures of the leadership of Cllr Connett should not be ignored or lauded and this council wishes to express its view (by vote of confidence) on the current leader’s decision making in light of violent conduct in this chamber and the increasingly dangerous environment in which elected representatives, officers and staff must work.

Minutes:

Cllr Swain presented his Notice of Motion on the constitution. This was referred to Procedures Committee for consideration.

The Leader presented his Notice of Motion on moving with the times - 21st Century Councils This was referred to the Executive for consideration.

Cllr Macgregor presented his Notice of Motion on a vote of no confidence in the Leader.

Some Members asked for a debate in line with Council Procedural Rule 4.9.4 having two thirds of those present needed to agree to a debate. A recorded vote was asked for by at least five Members under Procedure Rule 4.13.5 and it was lost.

Recorded vote under Procedure Rule 4.13.5

For: Cllrs Daws, Eden, Hocking, MacGregor, Mullone and Patch

(6 Members)

Against: Cllrs Bullivant, Colclough, Connett, D Cox, H Cox, Dewhirst, Goodman-Bradbury, Gribble, Hayes, G Hook, J Hook, Jeffrey, Jeffries, Jenks, Keeling, Kerswell, Morgan, Nutley, Nuttall, J Petherick, Phipps, Rollason, Russell, Swain, Taylor, Wrigley, Evans and Parker.

(28 Members)

Abstain: Cllrs Clarance, Parker-Khan, L Petherick and Tume.

(4 Members)

Cllr Cook did not vote.

Absent: Cllrs Austen, Bradford, Foden, Haines, Orme, Peart, Purser and Thorne.

(8 Members)

The Leader gave a statement in response to this Notice of Motion of no confidence.

Cllr Macgregor proposed his Notice of Motion, this was seconded by Cllr Eden, put to the vote and lost.

A recorded vote was asked for by at least five Members under Procedure Rule 4.13.5.