The following Motion has been submitted in accordance with Council Procedure Rules 15.1 and 15.2.
Proposer – Councillor Oppler
Seconder – Councillor Walsh
At this time of financial hardship, many Arun residents are looking at ways of cutting down on their financial expenditures. They are closely examining what they can cut out and what is really needed for the future.
Our residents are also facing year-on-year council tax rises, and many residents in Arun are on fixed incomes, so these increases become even more of a struggle.
Since the last boundary review, Arun District Council has cut hundreds of members of staff from the council. Departmental budgets have continued to contract year on year. Residents and staff have all paid the price for these reductions.
The last boundary review in 2012 missed a golden opportunity to significantly reduce the number of councillors, it settled for a total reduction of two.
If Arun were to reduce the number of councillors by twenty, the council would save well in excess of £100,000 per year.
Therefore, this council agrees to:-
1)? Invite the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to carry out a review of:-
a)? The number of councillors needed at Arun, but with a specific focus of reducing members by a maximum of twenty.
b) ?The warding arrangements in the Arun district.
2)? Instruct officers to carry out an assessment of how much an individual member costs the council. This should include the basic allowance, IT provision, and all hidden officer support.
Minutes:
The Chair confirmed that a Motion had been submitted for this meeting from Councillor Oppler. The detail of the Motion is set out below:
This council agrees to:-
1) Invite the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to carry out a review of:-
a) The number of councillors needed at Arun, but with a specific focus of reducing members by a maximum of twenty.
b) The warding arrangements in the Arun district.
2) Instruct officers to carry out an assessment of how much an individual member costs the council. This should include the basic allowance, IT provision, and all hidden officer support.
The Chair invited Councillor Oppler to present his motion. Councillor Oppler outlined that during this time of financial hardship, many of Arun’s residents were looking at ways of cutting down on their financial expenditures and were closely examining what they could cut out and what they might really need for the future.
Councillor Oppler stated that residents were also facing year-on-year council tax rises, and many were on fixed incomes, so these increased were becoming an ever-increasing struggle. Since the last boundary review, Arun District Council had cut hundreds of members of staff from the council; departmental budgets had continued to contract year on year; and residents and staff had had to pay the price for these reductions. The last boundary review undertaken in 2012 had missed a golden opportunity to significantly reduce the number of councillors, with it settling for a total reduction of two Councillors out of the then fifty-six. Councillor Oppler stated that when he had been Deputy Leader of the Council, he had looked into progressing this matter, however, it had coincided with the start of the Covid-19 pandemic and so having received guidance from the then Chief Executive and in looking at staff resources at that time, it had not been possible to move considering such proposals forward.
Councillor Oppler believed that the timing was now right to progress this work and he suggested that the Council should seek advice from other Councils, such as Chichester District Council, who had achieved a positive outcome from reviewing Councillor numbers. Councillor Oppler felt that it would be pertinent to focus on a reduction of between 36 and 40 Councillors and he outlined that there was software available through a company called Express Mapping that could help facilitate reviewing Councillor numbers and ward mapping. Councillor Oppler felt strongly that this was something that this Council should consider but more importantly he referred to the fact that staff and residents had had to make sacrifices over the last few years and that by reducing the number of Councillors the Council could make significant savings. Councillor Oppler provided some examples one of which was that if the council were to reduce the number of councillors by twenty, the council would save well in excess of £100,000 per year.
In concluding his motion, Councillor Oppler highlighted the need to start this work now as the review process was not quick and the advice he had received conformed that any review could take between two and two and a half years to complete and implement. He therefore needed to confirm that if his motion was approved, it would not affect next year’s elections.
The Monitoring Officer was asked to confirm if the former Electoral Review Sub-Committee could be reformed to oversee the review. The Group Head of Law & Governance & Monitoring Officer confirmed that the Corporate Support Committee had responsibility for boundary reviews already confirmed in its Responsibility for Functions in the Constitution. It would be for that Committee to undertake and oversee the review work making recommendations to Full Council as to what the final decision should be.
Councillor Walsh then seconded the motion.
The
Chair then invited debate. Those to
speak first confirmed that whilst they could agree the underlying
principle of the motion, the motion set out parameters without an
evidence base. Given the November 2022 electoral register the
average number of electors that each Councillor represented was
2,372 which when applied to each Ward highlighted that the Beach
Ward was over-represented by 18.68% whilst the Angmering &
Findon was under represented by 17.65%. Based on this data alone,
there was a case for rewarding. There had always been a cost to
democracy that had to be balanced against the equity of a fair seat
distribution throughout the district. The whole rewarding process
could take 3-4 years judging by the last review so there could be
no change to the council’s size or seat distribution until at
least 2027. There was a process that was laid down by the Local
Government Boundary Commission for England which the council would
need to follow. To initiate the
process, Councillor Bower confirmed that the council needed to
amend the motion replacing recommendations (1) and (2) and so he
formally proposed the following amendment (additions have been
shown in bold with deletions shown using
strikethrough :
(1) Carry out an assessment of the costs of doing a local government boundary review and provide recommendations to the Policy & Finance Committee on the resourcing implications of such a review;
(2) Set up the appropriate processes and timetable for carrying out such a review, and report this back to Full Council;
(3) Once the above steps are complete, invite the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to carry out a review of:
(a)
The number of councillors needed at Arun, but with a
specific focus of reducing members by a maximum of
twenty
(b) The warding arrangements in the Arun District
This Council also agrees to:
(4) Instruct Officers to carry out an assessment of how much an individual member costs the council. This should include the Basic Allowance, IT provision and all hidden officer support;
(5) Once the number of Councillors is determined, instruct the Constitution Working Party to review the number and frequency of Committees in light of a reduction in Councillors; and
(6) Invite the Independent Remuneration Panel to review Councillor allowances in light of the above changes, once confirmed.
Councillor Gunner then seconded this amendment.
In response to this detailed amendment being received, the Chair proposed a five-minute adjournment to allow the wording of the amendment to be shared to the meeting and circulated to Councillors. This was approved by the Council.
Upon the meeting reconvening following the adjournment, the Chair then invited debate on the amendment. Councillor Oppler, as the proposer to the motion, indicated that he would be happy to accept the amendment proposed.
Before inviting further debate, the Chair sought confirmation from Councillors Oppler and Walsh, as the proposer and seconder of the original motion, in terms of whether they were content to have the motion, as amended, as the substantive motion. Having received this confirmation from Councillors Oppler and Walsh, the Chair confirmed that she would not invite debate on this substantive motion.
Debate on the amendment then took place. There were some Councillors who felt that they could not support the motion reflecting back on the previous review and the problems experienced. Most Councillors spoke in support of it but questioned its timing, asking why it was being pushed forward now when this should have been considered much earlier following the 2019 Elections to allow any recommendations from the Boundary Commission for England to be considered ahead of next year’s District Elections. Comments were made that this review should also focus on the efficiency and effectiveness of Councillors and not just about the number of Councillors that the Council should have.
Councillor Walsh, as seconder of the motion, welcomed the support shown surrounding the sentiment of the motion. It needed to be recognised the financial savings such a review could bring to the council whilst at the same time making it more efficient and democratically accountable. He hoped that all councillors would support it, as amended, recognising the cost of living crisis that residents were currently experiencing.
Councillor Oppler, as proposer of the motion, thanked Opposition Councillors for their willingness to work together in producing an amended motion that hopefully all Councillors could support.
Following further debate, the Council
RESOLVED – That
(1) The Council carries out an assessment of the costs of doing a local government boundary review and provides recommendations to the Policy & Finance Committee on the resourcing implications of such a review;
(2) The Council sets up the appropriate processes and timetable for carrying out such a review, and reports this back to Full Council;
(3) Once the above steps are complete, invites the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to carry out a review of:
(a) The number of councillors needed at Arun, but with a specific focus of reducing members
(b) The warding arrangements in the Arun District
This Council also agrees to:
(4) Instruct Officers to carry out an assessment of how much an individual member costs the council. This should include the Basic Allowance, IT provision and all hidden officer support;
(5) Once the number of Councillors is determined, instruct the Constitution Working Party to review the number and frequency of Committees in light of a reduction in Councillors; and
(6) Invite the Independent Remuneration Panel to review Councillor allowances in light of the above changes, once confirmed.