To receive questions from members of the public who wish to ask a general question.
Minutes:
(1) A member of the public made reference to a question he had asked previously regarding the Council’s Standing Orders and the fifty word limit to questions from members of the public. He was assured by the Deputy Leader at the time that a review was to take place and this would be considered. Nothing further happened. He raised this matter again in March, 2017 and was advised by the Leader that Standing Orders was at that time subject to review. Unfortunately, no revision had been made to the word limit for questions and this was still constrained at fifty words.
In addition, at an earlier Cabinet meeting the member of the public had taken issue with only being allowed one question and a supplementary and was advised by the Monitoring Officer about the procedure in place. Having trawled through the Standing Orders, its appendices and schedules the procedure referred to was included, but asked was it feasible to expect a member of the public to have to extensively search for such a document.
The member of the public asked if the Council was to do what it promised and revise Standing Orders.
Councillor Read, the Leader, addressed the two questions asked and confirmed the fifty word limit related to questions to Council which must be received in writing in advance. Standing Orders had been reviewed and no changes were proposed to the word limit, although some amendments had been made to the petition scheme.
In terms of questions to the Cabinet this was a little more relaxed approach as there was no word limit, questions could be asked from the floor and engagement was welcomed where appropriate.
The Leader did accept and had some sympathy with the location of the procedure for asking questions at Cabinet meetings and would discuss this further with the Democratic Services Manager to ensure the procedure for Cabinet and the submitting of questions to Council was more accessible and readily available on the Council’s website.
In a supplementary question the member of the public asked why it was mentioned in March, when it was now October, that a review of Standing Orders would take place and nothing further had been done.
The Leader described the extensive process of looking at Standing Orders, which had been taken forward and updated to make them easier to understand.
In a further supplementary question the member of the public pointed out he had submitted a written question for the next Council meeting which was three words over the word limit. He had been asked to redraft, but for the sake of three words this should be allowed. However, it was not always possible to set out complex questions into fifty words and suggested the word limit be relooked at as this had been in operation for a number of years.
The Leader explained Standing Orders had been reviewed, but was unable to offer a commitment to look at the fifty word limit again.
(2) The member of the public referred to the publication of the investigations reports where he had asked a question of Commissioner Ney around why Rotherham, which was no worse than other areas such as Newcastle, Bradford, Oxford or Rochdale, had called for independent enquiries and the others had not. He asked why was Rotherham still paying for Commissioners to oversee the work of the Council and believed it was time they left. He asked that feedback be provided to the Secretary of State in this regard by Commissioners and civil servants.