At the Annual General Meeting of the Council held on 11^th June 2014, CouncillorShiria Khatun was appointed Chair of the General Purposes Committee for the Municipal Year 2014/2015.

However, it is necessary to elect a Vice-Chair of the General Purposes Committee for the Municipal Year 2014/2015.

Councillor Danny Hassell nominated that Councillor David Edgar be appointed Vice Chair of the General Purposes Committee for the duration of the municipal year and the nomination was seconded by Councillor Rajib Ahmed.  There being no other nominations, it was

RESOLVED –

(1)    That Councillor David Edgar be appointed Vice-Chair of the General Purposes Committee for the duration of the municipal year.

No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interest were made.

The unrestricted minutes of the General Purposes Committee held on 19 March 2014 were presented for approval.

RESOLVED –

(1)    That, subject to the amendment that Councillor Craig Aston was present at the meeting, the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on 19 March 2014 be agreed and signed by the Chair, as a correct record of the proceedings.

The report was introduced by Jonathan Regal who explained that the report set out the Committee’s terms of reference, quorum, membership, and dates for the municipal year 2014/15 for information of members of the General Purposes Committee.

Members asked whether the General Purposes Committee had responsibility for appointments to external bodies as he thought they were the responsibility of the Executive Mayor and/or Council.  Meic Sullivan-Gould replied that he was unaware of any appointments that the Committee were responsible.  The General Purposes Committee agreed that a list be devised showing the external bodies that the General Purposes Committee had responsibility for.

Members enquired whether the General Purposes Committee could be responsible for appointing councillors to new bodies that were not the responsibility of the Executive Mayor and/or Council.  Meic Sullivan-Gould replied that the General Purposes Committee could be responsible for appointing councillors to those new bodies that were not the responsibility of the Executive Mayor and/or Council.

Members requested that Democratic Services ask the Tower Hamlets First group for their nominations for deputies for the General Purposes Committee.

RESOLVED –

(1)    That the General Purposes Committee noted its terms of reference, quorum, membership and dates of future meetings as set out in appendices 1, 2 and 3 of the report of the Service Head, Democratic Services.

(2)    That a list be devised showing the external bodies that the General Purposes Committee had responsibility for the appointment of officers, members or other people.

(3)    That Democratic Services ask the Tower Hamlets First group for their nominations for deputies for the General Purposes Committee.

Meic Sullivan-Gould provided an oral update on the governance review that commenced last year.  He informed the General Purposes Committee that:

Ø  The Law, Probity and Governance section was heavily involved in the governance review that would see the revamping of the Council’s constitution.

Ø  The review was being led by a working group consisting of senior officers and advisors on productivity at the LGA.

Ø  The working group work included –

vThe “Local Choice” Functions – legislation largely determined what functions were either “Executive” or “Council”.  However, there was some local choice in certain specified functions that required a number of approaches to determining the most appropriate decision-making mechanism in those cases.

vThe Policy Framework determinable by the Full Council – there was a statutory list of policies which can only be proposed by a Mayor but must be approved by Full Council.  However, there was a local discretion to extend that list.

vThe dispute resolution procedures in the Budget and Policy Framework Rules – there were a wide number of approaches to deal with disputes about the content of policies and their revision.  Equally, there were differences of approach where the Mayor was proposing to do or already doing something that members of the Full Council consider to be beyond the mandated Budget and Policy Framework.

vThe discretion of the Directly Elected Mayor to make in year adjustments to budgets – there were a number of different approaches.

vThe respective roles of the Directly Elected Mayor and the Chairman/Speaker of the Council – each authority has a unique solution to an area where both the legislation and government guidance is silent.  Whatever the local solution it does however need to be agreed and recorded so that there is clarity in the respective roles.

vThe processes for revising the Constitution – the Constitution sets out the rules that the Council and Administration adopt in order to deliver services and resolve disputes democratically in a rapidly changing world.  The rules need regular review and there needed to be a quick, authoritative and clear approach to allow the Council and its Administration to be agile to respond to new and emerging challenges and opportunities.

vThe Council Procedure Rules – there were a range of approaches as to how the Full Council operates where there is a Directly Elected Mayor.

vThe recording of and dissemination of images and sound of decision-making – With Royal Assent from the Local Audit and Accountability Act, regulations were now expected to extend the access to meetings, access to documents and freedom of information regimes to include a right to record and transmit the proceedings of the Council and its Administration.  There will be a number of ways in which to meet those new requirements.

vOverview and Scrutiny – this function was a product of the Local Government Act 2000 and was expressly modelled on the Select Committee system in the House of Commons.  Select Committees had changed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

The General Purposes Committee agreed to defer the item so that:

(a)    there would be sufficient time to digest the information contained within the report; and

(b)    ward councillors could consult constituents about the proposal.

The General Purposes Committee agreed to attend training prior to the next meeting so that they were aware of their role in determining this quasi-judicial application that could be contentious and subject to a High Court challenge.

The General Purposes Committee, duly

RESOLVED –

(1)    That the application for registration as a town or village green at Wapping Green be deferred to the next meeting of the General Purposes Committee on 10 December 2014.

(2)    That training on the determination of this quasi-judicial application be given prior to next meeting.

RESOLVED –

(1)    That in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting on the grounds that the remaining agenda item contained information defined as exempt or confidential in Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

The restricted minutes of the General Purposes Committee held on 19 March 2014 were presented for approval.

RESOLVED –

(1)    That, subject to the amendment that Councillor Craig Aston was present at the meeting, the restricted minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on 19 March 2014 be agreed and signed by the Chair, as a correct record of the proceedings.

RESOLVED –

(1)    That the officer recommendations be agreed.

The General Purposes Committee agreed that the following reports be submitted to a future meeting of the General Purposes Committee:

(a)    the adopted code of conduct for elections; and

(b)    individual voter registration.

The General Purposes Committee, duly

RESOLVED –

(1)    That reports on individual voter registration be submitted to a future meeting of the General Purposes Committee.