Agenda item

6.1

The Committee received a report of the Director of Policy and Democratic Engagement. The Head of Policy and Partnerships (Laurie Brenan) presented the report.

6.2

The Head of Policy and Partnerships thanked Ruth Hubbard for submitting the public questions and helping the Committee focus on the next steps.

6.3

The Head of Policy and Partnerships explained that this piece of work began during the transition to committees’ period and that it was going to be a large piece of work that took place over a long period of time. The Council consulted with community groups and members of the public in regard to community participation, to understand what strengths and good practice they thought the Council already had, and to identify key areas of weakness that needed to be addressed and improved. The Head of Policy and Partnerships confirmed this piece of work had already begun and also mentioned how it was in alignment with the Lowcock report, LGA (Local Government Association) Peer Review and Race Equality Commission report.

6.4

The Head of Policy and Partnerships explained that the report highlighted some examples of when the Council had demonstrated good practice in relation to community engagement. He mentioned how citizens explained that their experience was inconsistent across the organisation therefore this had been incorporated into the Council’s vision going forward.

6.5

The Head of Policy and Partnerships referred to the recommendations, in which it was recommended that Strategy & Resources Policy Committee (S&R) added citizen participation to its work programme. He explained that this was not to move work from the Governance Committee to S&R but due to S&R strategically leading the organisation’s agenda, whilst working with other committees.

6.6

Members of the Committee asked questions, and made comments and observations, as summarised below:

6.7

A Member of the Committee welcomed the report and the citizen engagement approach. They mentioned how local residents were being consulted in co-designing playgrounds for their local area therefore this approach could be used for that process.

The Head of Policy and Partnerships mentioned how this was positive and that this approach should not take years to impact citizens. The Council should harness the capacity of Policy Committees, Local Area Committees and the activity that Councillors undertake in their wards. He added that there needed to be Member and Officer ambassadors that people could consult with prior to undertaking engagement so that the approach was clear and consistent across the organisation.

6.8

A Member of the Committee thanked everyone for their involvement on the report. They explained how good practice should not be dismissed, although stated that areas of weakness needed to be improved. They mentioned that the emphasis was on early consultation and how important the pre-decision scrutiny would be, for example, who and how can the Council consult with citizens. The Member stated that the Committee discussed at a previous workshop that the culture needed to change and still believed this was the important part to consider. They referred to the Policy Committee toolkit, which was introduced following the transition to committee system, and wondered how often that was being used. They added that it was important to consult with those who do not already actively consult with the Council. They suggested that when a decision was to be made at a Policy Committee, that roundtable discussions at Local Area Committees took place prior to that. The Member of the Committee referred to the recommendations, they explained that this piece of work should remain as part of the work of Governance Committee, rather than referring it to S&R. They did not believe that referring large or controversial decisions to S&R was in the spirit of the referendum and the transition to the committee system.

The Head of Policy and Partnerships referred to the engagement toolkit and mentioned how this was introduced to help guide Members and Officers in a new unfamiliar committee system. He stated that this could be enhanced as part of the member development work and mentioned how Officers could take advantage of the opportunities as part of pre-agenda planning and meetings to embed that early citizen engagement.

6.9

A Member of the Committee referred to two previous occasions in which citizens were consulted on schemes in their local areas, but were disappointed with the outcomes. Although that consultation was carried out, it did not result in the favour of those local people affected and they therefore believed there were some lessons to be learnt from those experiences. They explained that there was also a time when a survey was carried out by the Friends of Norfolk Park Community Group in which some very useful data was collected and shared with the Parks and Countryside Service therefore that was an occasion where good consultation and collaboration with citizens took place.

6.10

The Chair explained that she had previously spoken with the Transport department and that she was due to speak with Parks & Countryside Service regarding piloting this approach in the near future.

6.11

A Member of the Committee mentioned that the Governance Committee should retain this piece of work rather than referring it to S&R, even if it meant that additional resources needed to be considered.

6.12

A Member of the Committee mentioned that the Committee could consider that there might be a local priority for Sheffield based consultants, to build on knowledge and expertise.

The Head of Policy and Partnerships agreed that the public question from Ruth Hubbard was right regarding the potential to commission locally based organisations and that there were real expertise and knowledge in the city with existing connections to the communities therefore the Council needed to consider how to best use this resource.

6.13

A Member of the Committee referred to the Governance Committee’s terms of reference and therefore believed the Committee should continue to see this piece of work through. They stated that too many decisions were being referred to S&R, although they should remain at the appropriate committees.

6.14

A Member of the Committee also raised concerns around the recommendation to S&R. They mentioned that S&R did have a role in this work, although this should remain as part of the work carried out by the Governance Committee.

6.15

A Member of the Committee referred to the recent decision made regarding road safety measures being removed and how the voices of young people were not captured enough in that process.

They stated that, although discussions were being captured, in minutes, such as Local Area Committee minutes, they were not being captured in minutes of Policy Committee meetings.

They referred to the suggestion in the report around Members meeting with citizens to see how views varied, and mentioned how this was about Members taking ownership and building back trust.

6.16

The Chair mentioned that a greater level of involvement needed to be carried out when the Council was making decisions that affected citizens’ behaviours. Citizens needed to be a part of the process so the Council could ensure the decisions were successful. The Chair agreed that Local Area Committees could play a key role in consultation at early stages of a decision.

6.17

The Chair moved to the recommendations in the report. There were three recommendations put forward to the Committee as follows.

That the Governance Committee:

1. note and discuss the findings and recommendations in the draft report by Involve that was developed with citizens, stakeholders and our staff.

2.     refer the draft report by Involve and any comments and perspectives from Governance Committee to the Strategy and Resources Committee, proposing that:

·       the development of citizen participation is included in the S&R workplan;

·       the S&R Committee use the draft Involve report together with the views of this Committee to lead the commissioning of activity in response to the recommendations; and

·       the S&R Committee work with other Policy Committees and Local Area Committees (LACs) to identify opportunities for pilots and demonstrator projects for citizen involvement and participation.

3.     agree to revise the Governance Committee’s workplan, recognising that the transformation of community involvement and citizen participation must be core to the City Council’s strategic development and is best led by the S&R Committee. This will enable Governance Committee to focus capacity on the review of Committee Remits (in line with the Six-Month Review).

6.18

On being put to the vote, Recommendation 1 was carried.

6.19

The Chair proposed an additional recommendation that the Committee sent the Involve report to the citizens involved in the workshops and to thank them for their contributions and to encourage them to feed their views back on the report so that it can be fed into this work as it goes forward and with the aim to continuously involve them from this point on.

This recommendation was carried.

6.20

The General Counsel (David Hollis) explained that the Governance Committee was not a Policy Committee and remit was not to implement policies like Policy Committees could. He stated that the Committee’s role was advisory and it could advise on constitutional changes to Full Council. He mentioned that the engagement work discussed at this meeting would go beyond constitution and governance as it operationally needed to be embedded across the organisation. Therefore, the recommendation was to S&R as the appropriate body for approving this. He added that S&R approved its work programme with each Member of S&R having a vote.

6.21

A Member of the Committee said that they did not believe that Members of S&R, would not have the capacity to undertake this piece of work.

6.22

The Chair mentioned that as this was about changing culture and engaging widely with citizens, which was a cross council issue, and that it should be referred to S&R. She added that as part of the recommendation, S&R would be commissioning a body to lead on this and therefore believed they would have the capacity to carry out this work.

6.23

A Member of the Committee mentioned that they would be supporting the recommendation to refer citizen participation to S&R as they believed that Committee would have the most influence on other committees taking ownership of engagement.

6.24

Councillor Sue Alston proposed a recommendation that this Committee “moved to set up a schedule of workshops to start the discussions and work on this report, and engages widely with outside communities and brings regular updates to this Committee and reports the outcomes of its discussions to Full Council or S&R.”

Councillor Paul Turpin proposed an amendment to the proposal to include ‘and to make recommendations including the commissioning of activity to S&R or Full Council as appropriate.’

On being put to the vote, the Committee agreed the amendment and then further agreed the recommendation as amended. The effect of the changes were that the original recommendations 2 and 3 as outlined in the report were lost.

6.25

RESOLVED: That the Governance Committee:

1. notes and discuss the findings and recommendations in the draft report by Involve that was developed with citizens, stakeholders and our staff;

2. sends the Involve report to the citizens involved in the workshops and to thank them for their contributions and to encourage them to feed their views back on the report so that it can be fed into this work as it goes forward and with the aim to continuously involve them from this point on; and

3. moves to set up a schedule of workshops to start the discussions and work on this report, and engages widely with outside communities and brings regular updates to this Committee and reports the outcomes of its discussions to Full Council or S&R and makes recommendations including the commissioning of activity to S&R or Full Council as appropriate.