Transcript

Transcript

any apologies for absence. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Apologies from Councillor MURPHY. Mr. Mayor, from Councillor Stephen Habermel, he's unfortunately had to go and tend to his brother, who's in ICU. Councillor Waifield. Once again, yes, Councillor Martin Terry, thank you. Councillor COX, would you please send my ‑‑ I think I was okay with the Councillor. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I will do. I'll pass on your kind words. Thank you. Yeah, I think someone's got a hand up over there. Councillor Bary, is it? Councillor Bary. Not exactly an apology for absence, but as you can see, I've been hearing that I'm not incredibly well, so I'll be an apology for absenting myself from part of the meeting later on. I'll be leaving early. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Are there any declarations of interest? No? Councillor CUMMING, do you want to make a motion? Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to express on behalf of the Labor Group, and hopefully I'm sure the whole of the new administration, our sending our thoughts and wishes to Councillor Habermel and his family tonight. Councillor CUMMING, do you want to put forward a motion? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Subject to Part 4A 16.1L of the Constitution, I move that this meeting debate a motion that the element of list C relating to the appointment of scrutiny chairs and vice chairs be adjourned to a reconvening of the annual meeting at a date to be agreed in consultation with yourself. Thank you. The Council is now asked to appoint a chair and vice chair to each of the regulators. Sorry. We need to take a vote on that proposal. Mr. Mayor, may I be permitted to speak on this item, please? Yes, that's fine. Sorry, Councillor Courtney, can we please have a vote on the motion put forward by Councillor CUMMING? Mr. Mayor, might not allow to speak before we have the vote. Can we please have a vote? Mr. Mayor, I wonder if I could assist. So this first vote is just to get Council's agreement to allow this motion to stand, and then there will be a debate, and then there will be a debate. This vote is just to give permission for this to be entered on to the agenda as it were. Excuse me, Councillors, if you would just be patient with me for a moment, please. I can refer you to clause 16, rule 16 in the procedure rules that says motions without notice. The following motions may be brought, maybe moved without notice. That means they don't need to give nine days notice, and there's a list of them, and one of them is that the meeting or debate or motion be adjourned. So the motion on the floor at the moment from the leader is that part of our current agenda, that part relating to the appointment of scrutiny chairs and vice chairs, be adjourned to a future meeting of the Annual Council by agreement with the Chair, and that's perfectly proper. It doesn't require a suspension of standing orders. Thank you. Sorry, Mr. Mayor, we have some advice, as to why we're unable to speak on this motion that's been put forward, because I don't understand why this should be put to vote without the ability for me to speak on this. There's been a motion put forward by Councillor Cohen. We are now going to vote on that motion. Can I please have—can I please—can I please have that vote? Are we in agreement? [inaudible] [inaudible] Okay, Council. So the motion has been put forward by Councillor Cohen is to be voted upon to bring it on to the meeting tonight. Then there will be a debate, and on that motion, once it's on to the agenda. So you will have a chance to debate it, but first and foremost, we need to agree whether or not we're bringing it on to the agenda or not. So the first vote is to bring it on to the agenda, as I said, and then the second, but then we will move into the debate. So the first vote is to bring it on to the agenda. Councillor Aylin, do you want to say something? Mr Chair, as I understand, this is a notice of motion to discuss a notice of motion. As a notice of motion, I understood, and all the years have been here, that we discussed notice of motions before we vote on them. So surely we should discuss the notice of motion that we're going to put a notice of motion before we vote on it. Isn't that how it works, or do we now just railroad motions through? Thank you, Councillor Aylin. I just want to clarify where we are. So, previous to the meeting starting tonight, there was a motion that was circulated round to all groups. That motion is not being put forward this evening, so that motion is withdrawn. However, Councillor Kerwin has put forward a motion in relation to an element, in relation to the scrutiny chairs, which would lead to a deferral of that motion, of that element of the agenda for tonight. So, what the first part of the vote is, is to bring it on to the agenda, and then the second part is whether or not we vote or not to defer those appointment elements for this evening. Mr Mayor, may I, with all due respect, request that my request to speak be granted given you've given another member of the Council, or an audience, and you've refused mine. That seems a little unfair. Councillor Cawley, you can come in. Thank you, Mr Mayor. This seems rather confusing to me. 17 minutes before the scheduled start of the first full Council meeting this evening, we were emailed round by officers, a motion that was going to be proposed by the Leader of the Council. We're now being told that that motion is not going to take place. However, part of the agenda item, which is what this motion would have counted, needs to be suspended. I don't understand how the Leader can believe that he is able to form an administration and proceed for the next two years if he's only able to circulate this motion 17 minutes before the meeting. He then fills the needs to withdraw it and come back at a later time for who knows what as of yet, because I can't believe there would be any other possible outcome for this, because otherwise the Leader would surely have circulated this with several days' worth of notice. I just find it incredible that we've had 17 minutes' notice for a motion, which was then the reason for the delay to change the Constitution with no due notice for the motion to now be withdrawn minutes into the meeting. How on earth does the Leader believe that is a good way to start his administration? Councillor CUNY, I take your point. Councillor COCKS. Thank you, Mr Mayor. It's a procedural point because the purpose of tonight is to appoint the Chair's Vice-Chair's for all that statutory committees. If we don't appoint tonight and there is scrutiny committees that then need to sit before we consider, what do we do? Monitoring officer, do you want to say a few words on that? There will be a proposal to defer those scrutiny committees until after the adjourned annual, the portion of the adjourned annual meeting, and that meeting cannot be adjourned for too long because there's a statutory time frame within the annual meeting, within which the annual meeting must be held. I'm checking the dates, as you can understand, I haven't had a second to. I think it's the 7th of June, and so it might mean that everything will fall into place, but I will need to have the chance to check that. Thank you. Councillor interjecting. Can we move to the vote, please? So the first vote will be to bring it on to the statute for tonight. So vote 1 for yes and 2 for no. We just wait for that to come up. Okay. I'll now close the vote. So the results of that is 28 yes and 19 no, so the vote is carried. So now we move on to debate in relation to that. So now we go on to the debate. Yep. Oh, yeah, apologies. Yes. Is there a second? That's a motion. Okay. Okay. Can we please have some order? We will now have, we've got it seconded by Councillor Colleins. We will take the vote again. Thank you. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] Okay, thank you. I'll now close the vote. Yep. So yes, 28 no, 19, so therefore the vote is carried. Now, open the motion for debate. Please keep your hands up until they've been recognised. Thank you. So, Councillor Cowan, can I ask you if you would open the debate, please? As has been discussed quite a bit already, we were delayed for a very long time because the opposition decided that they would rather spend 20 minutes arguing the toss over something that ultimately we're going to come back and do wasting everybody's time and council money, but that is what we have come to expect from this opposition. The council's constitutional position on the chairing of scrutiny committees does not align with common practice in the constitutions of over 60 unitary authorities with cabinet arrangements. The current agreement was not adhered to in practice or in spirit by the previous administration. No, it was not. And as it's in conflict with common practice and they've already set a precedent, it is necessary for us to amend the constitution. The opposition are unwilling for that to happen tonight, so it's necessary for us to adjourn the meeting or an element of the meeting to another date in order to allow us to change the constitution via report from the monitoring officer, which will happen as soon as possible. So we are here to debate, and I'm sure we'll be here a very long time with lots of comments from the opposition, but we are here to debate whether or not we should defer. And I implore colleagues to defer so that we can get this business sorted and fix the mess that they left. Mr. Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Never in my time on this council have I heard such nonsense as when I have just heard from Councillor Cowan. Last year, the chairs were held by independent members who were not a member of the administration. That is what the constitution said. Ten minutes before this meeting, we received a motion from Councillor Cowan via officers saying that they wanted to rub rush shot over the constitution. That they no longer cared for democracy, they no longer cared for that. I mean, I've just been to Cuba, perhaps Councillor Cowan would like to visit it and see what these sort of actions have. This is quite simply power and politics over principals and people. We already know the allegations made to the new leader of the council. I won't bear to repeat them. But we have to remember that the last time the Labor led this council, we had a £14 million deficit. They couldn't even cut the grass more than once a year, and now we're in a situation where we have this motion in front of us to delay a decision on who should be the chairs and vice chairs. I should tell you who the chairs and vice chairs should be, the same as they have been every year I've been a councillor, the opposition, not the members of the administration. You should not have the right to mark your own homework. It's not just me that says that. It's the LGA that say that. It is good practice. It is good governance. And this council has already been pulled up for bad governance. We are going in a backwards direction. Things in South End are only going to get worse because we are refusing to make decisions. Councillor COWAN said that the reason he's put this motion to defer is because, oh, we delayed the meeting. The reason we delayed the meeting is because he gave his motion 10 minutes before the meeting. The reason why he is delaying this is because, frankly, he doesn't know what he's doing. He doesn't know what he's going to do for the next year and all he can do is create chaos and carnage in this city. That is what this motion is doing. There's no reason he can't do the standing orders and put his motion forward tonight. He could do that right now. We've got time. He's making an excuse for his narcissistic behaviour. That's about mine. [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, Councillor. Can I just ask people to refrain from personal attacks on fellow Councillors? [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm actually quite embarrassed tonight to be a member of this council, like this has been run. Sorry, what was that? If this is the way, if this is signs of things to come, I just feel even more sorry for the residents that are going to reap what is sown in here from start to finish. But what I am actually going to do is read out a speech from Councillor Caffe Murphy because she is not here and she asked me to. As you may have seen, I have resigned from the Labor Party. I was a Labor Councillor when elected in May 2022, but I have been a non-aligned Councillor for St. Luke's ward since September 2022. [INAUDIBLE] Can we stop shouting across the chamber? If we carry on in this frame of mind, I will suspend the council. We can all go and reflect on our behaviours and we will come back at a certain time. So please stop that going. If you've got a point of order, put your hand up, it will get picked up and at that point you can then speak. Councillor Jones, can you switch off your mic for a moment while we take this point of order? Thank you. [INAUDIBLE] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Point of order. I believe that in order to make speeches, it needs to be on the topic of the agenda. The speech or the addition that Councillor Jones is speaking about is not on the agenda item and they're therefore not relevant business and should not be heard. Thank you. Councillor Jones, would you continue, but please, please stick to the motion. Thank you. Okay, in relation to the motion, my promise when I was elected was to work for, and with everyone in the world, regardless of political beliefs and the promise remains. In relation to the motion, I do not need to be a Labour member to serve my ward. Indeed, by no longer being held to ransom by the whip to tow the Labour party line, I will be free to better represent St. Luke's. Several people in and out of the South and Labour group have spoken about the toxicity of the group and ex-leader of the group shared his experience and opinion of the current leader using the words. And their words, bullying, coercive, controlling, ego and the egoist, a spiteful toxic vindictive misogynist. Councillor Jones. In relation to this motion. Councillor Jones. Yes, Mayor. Could you please, can you please talk to the motion and not read out something which is not on the motion, please. It's quite clear he's saying in relation to the motion. Councillor Cox. Thank you, Mayor. I can understand why people don't want to hear it, but I propose that we suspend standing orders to allow Councillor Jones to be heard. Councillor Jones, would you continue, please, and stick to the motion. Mr Mayor, Councillor COTS proposed to suspend standing orders. Are we going to vote for that or? Councillor interjecting. Okay, can we have a vote then please on suspending standing orders? Councillor interjecting. Mr Mayor, please, can the Councillor who is proposing that suspending order be suspended? Please let us know which standing orders they are wanting to suspend, please, and for what purpose? All of them, Mr Mayor, which we can do so we can allow someone to speak freely on that particular item. So it could be done from the floor. We can suspend standing orders, I believe. It's not possible to suspend all the standing orders. It's only possible to suspend those that are not legislatively provided, and it's not possible to suspend articles of the Constitution. Mr Mayor, we're not proposing that. It's quite clear what it is, is to allow Councillor Jones to finish off his speech, which can be done from the floor to allow them to speak under, I think it's schedule 16. Councillor interjecting. Can we take the vote, please? So if we can vote, we'll get it up on the screen, just coming up. So if we can vote one for yes to suspend and no, not suspend on this vote. It's not lawful to suspend against standing orders. That's just the advice I gave on the microphone. I'm not going to say that. I was standing here for you. [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] Okay, I'm now going to close the vote. So in terms of the vote, yes is 17, no is 27 with one abstention, so the vote is not carried. Councillor Jones, please continue your speech without referring to what Councillor X to Councillor Kathy Murphy has said, this is your speech, not hers. It may be her speech, but I would choose to say what I want to say. But I will stop there, Mr. Mayor, I'll stop there. But I won't be told what I can and can't say. I'm my own person and I chose to read that. Now, if it's coming back to this motion, like I say, I'm embarrassed that it was supported so much. I would urge everyone reflect on what we're seeing here tonight, the, want for a better word, the chaos, the residents are seeing this. They know why they want to push this back. It's positions for an administration that he had to get certain kind of agreements from. We know what it's for. But I'll end it there. I'm embarrassed for you all. Thank you. Councillor Cawney. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just fundamentally disagree with what Councillor Cawney said in his opening remarks, to be honest. I have no objection to the constitution being changed. I think what's proposed in the notice of motion that was valid for about 17 minutes is not what I would vote in favour of. But the constitution allows changes and therefore that's fine. We should vote on that and what have you, what will be, will be. What the significant delay of about 20 minutes was after we had 17 minutes notice of this, where the leader has taken days' worth of advice from the monitoring officer and the legal department, we chose to take a few minutes of legal advice around this. And our objection, certainly my objection to this, is the intention of the leader to act in a almost dictatory fashion, to choose to suspend the relevant sections of the standing order. So I not have a paper to support his constitution change, but also to not allow nine clear working days notice for that change, which would then have allowed everybody to have a much more reasoned conversation and debate around this, rather than the absolute fast that we've ended up having this evening. If the leader chooses to enter into some skullduggery within minutes of becoming leader of the Councillor, due to become leader of the Council, that's absolutely fine. But for gold's sake, have your ducks in a row before you do it. Because to propose this, to have this sent out minutes before the meeting, and to then fill the need to row back when the opposition opposes his proposal, and that's all that we have indicated that we are doing, I can't believe that's the reason he's done it. I would suggest what he hasn't got is he hasn't got the support of those parties that have entered into administration with him. They've said to him, I don't think so, mate, that's not what you should be doing. So he's had to, after showing us his cards, to say this is what he wants to do, to indicate that he wants to ride roughshod over the Constitution, that the Council has agreed on several occasions, and only a few months ago, the last time, which he was involved in as group leader, he has now decided that he needs to row back after publishing this, because he can't get support to row this through today. If that is the case, that's absolutely fine, but he needs to just admit it. But I really worry for him, Mr Mayor, that if within minutes of becoming leader, something that he's had days to prepare, he's had to row back from because he hasn't got support. How on earth is that going to be a good way to run the Council for the next couple of years? He just needs to admit where he is, say that he's made a mistake, and if he comes clean and upfront and honest about that now, hopefully, the next time we meet, we can all start from a fresh sheet of paper. I really hope he takes this opportunity to do so, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Councillor Courtney. Councillor being Gilbert. Thank you, Mr Mayor. We've heard a considerable amount of personal abuse from the bench's opposite, and yes, I do certainly find some of the language that they've used embarrassing. However, I want to stick to the principles of what the matter before the Council is. I, along with yourself, Mr Mayor, was involved in making the original constitutional change, which we are seeking now to reverse. The reason that we are seeking to reverse it is that it's clear that it hasn't been working. I am, whatever is said from the opposition, I, in my own mind and in my own conscience, are absolutely clear that the Conservative group used chairs of scrutiny as bargaining chips. That is not why we agreed to change the Constitution. I also believe that chairs of scrutiny were on a number of occasions lent on by their leader to do what the Conservatives thought was best, rather than what independently and robustly carry out their duties as a scrutiny chair. Thirdly, of course, the Labor group and the Liberal Democrat group being the principal opposition group. Councillor GILBERT, please do not make accusations that there is no proof of stating. Can you please stick to the point, stick to your speech, don't go off tangent. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Furthermore, last year, of course, it is a matter of record that the Liberal Democrat groups and the Labor groups, which were by the Labor Group being by far the largest opposition, were excluded from holding scrutiny chairs. Again, this breaks the spirit, if not the rules, as we intended to set them up. And you remember, Mr Mayor, that we did, under our administration, allow the Conservatives to take scrutiny chairs, which was the spirit of the rules that we put in. You know, I, therefore, I fully support the leader in seeking to make this change. And if constitutional procedures have become messy, you know, I'll just remind Councillors that it's been normal practice for the leader following a significant change in the balance of the Council, to tender his resignation so that we can do this in the proper time. That bit of precedent and good manners, which was honoured by Council whole craft and by myself, has not been followed by Councillor Cox. And also previously, leaders of the incoming leaders of the Council have been able to put their constitutional changes on the agenda. As I did as leader and as other incoming leaders have done, this has not been possible this time. Hence why we have to follow this extreme, this rather irregular procedure. But I urge members to ditch, you know, the personal abuse around one person and actually just think about the running of the Council. Point of order. Yeah, there is a point of order there. I believe you asked Councillor Gilbert to issue an apology where there was no basis. I think, Mr. Mayor, you were a chair of one scrutiny. Did I ever apply any pressure to you to do anything? No, no, no. I think it's a very, very, very, you know, if an accusation could be made, Mr. Mayor, you were a chair. It's a simple question. Did I ever apply any pressure to you, Mr. Chair? Councillor Aylin, would you please? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know you've ignored my point of order and you nearly got my name right. Pretty good. Can I refer to my point of order? It's very simple. We're using these to vote on everything. I understood we only use these for name votes. Have we changed the system? Because the problem is everyone can see who's voting and then it gets put on Facebook. But I'll go on to my point I wanted to talk about. If we go through this or delay this motion or reword it or anything, we have four working days before development control. We have three new people who have development control training. So the last day they can have their development control training is on the 28th. So the decision, whichever way it goes, needs to be done and all this needs to be dusted within four working days. Because we don't meet on Fridays, we don't meet on Saturdays, we don't meet on Sundays. How are we going to do it? You know, thank you. I think we're talking about scrutiny chairs and vice chairs and not talking about anything else. Councillor Nevin. Thank you, Chair. Yes, I'd just like to remind Council that last year we arrived at people's scrutiny meeting and were offered a member of the then administration to chair the meeting. That's a matter of public record. That person was in the chair before we were asked. Thank you. Councillor BUCK. Thank you. Well, firstly, I must correct Councillor Gilbert. You were wrong. The chairs of scrutiny came from the opposition groups. As there was no formal coalition entered into, we were a minority administration. Therefore, chairs were made up of opposition Councillors. Not for the first time tonight, I'm going to say that very little having entered uncomfortably into my sixth decade on this planet, very little surprises me these days. But once again, it seems that this Council Chamber has managed to do that. I thought it would take longer than one hour for Councillor COUNT to shut down free speech and democracy, but hey, here we are. It's happened already. The use of language is very important. The numbers that they quoted- Councillor BUCK. Can I ask you again? Be very careful. The numbers quoted in the notice of motion are a distraction. They're selected because, of course, there are 317 local authorities in the United Kingdom, of which only 60 use what he's proposing. Therefore, only 19% of local authorities actually use, so it is not the majority. It is their minority. And it is not usual or accepted way of doing things, which is what is proposed in this motion. So this motion is fundamentally flawed, contains loads of inaccuracies. As we've heard, it's also against the LGA guidance. So not only is he going against the guidance, not only is he trying to apply a practice that is only adopted by a minority of local authorities, but I think he doesn't want to be held to account. That's the real truth behind this. He's afraid of being held to account. Excuse me, Councillor BUCK. Councillor Cox, I'd like to listen to Councillor BUCK's words. I'm not sure you must do as well. If you want to have a discussion, take it outside, please. Councillor BUCK, please continue. Thank you. I'll repeat that last bit just in case anyone missed it. He's afraid of being held to account. He wants to be judged during an executioner of his own policies. I think a couple of months ago in his final speech in this Council chamber, we heard from his own colleague, who he'd worked alongside for many years, and in his own words, his own colleague described him as a narcissist. Should Councillor George have added a dictator to that? Councillor BUCK, any times I have to say this, please do not bring other people into your speech who are not in this Council chamber, stick to the point and carry on. You're finished. Thank you. Councillor Long-style. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Can I just say I've sat here for only two hours, and all we've done is spent 30 seconds election of the Leader of the Council. I'm tired of it already. It's completely dysfunctional, just listening to the tip for tap. Could we get on to the point of discussing the motion put forward? And as a point of clarity, it's changing the said part three, schedule 2.51. We're talking about the three committees, scrutiny committees, aren't we? And we're talking about taking chairs and vice chairs drawn from the members of those committees, which will be cross-party. Right? It's very straightforward. Let's be clear about that. And the previous Constitution entry mentions that those chairs and vice chairs should be from the opposition party or from the opposition groups. It still could be. I don't know why we're having all this muddslinging. It's just not appropriate. In fact, it's unacceptable. We should stick to the business that we're here to discuss personally. I think this should have been deferred. This meeting is specifically for appointments. That's what we should be doing. It's sticking to the agenda of appointments. It was rude to put this motion on this council 15 minutes before council meeting. We've now sat here for 20, for two hours, just muddslinging. It's not acceptable, and I don't want to be a part of it. Can we stick to the point? Let's defer this so we can all think about it or get on with the point of business of what this evening's about is appointments. The names written on the tin. That's what we're here for. I don't want to spend another nine minutes sitting here listening to this muddslinging. It's ridiculous, and frankly, it's unacceptable. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Chair. I think much of what Council on staff said was right. It was rude to do this just before the meeting. It has set the standard and tone for the next two years. Whereas my understanding was that the new leader specifically didn't want to have that sort of tone, but wanted his leadership to have a new era where people work together cross-party. But this has set the standard and muddslinging what we'll be doing for the next two years, I think. Last year, we spent hours talking about the Constitution and the year before. We'd cross-party working, talking about it. Why have we suddenly, 18 minutes before this meeting, I want to change a major part of that Constitution? Let's be frank, you can't change it. You've got the numbers. This is a Labor Administration that's supported by the three Eastwood Liberal Democrats. You've got the full support of the Liberal Democrats to run this town the way you want to run it. You've got the full support of the two Schubliness, so-called independent Councillors, Councillor Ward and Councillor Wakefield, who've immediately jumped into bed with Labor to support you again to do whatever you want. You've got the support of the Thorp independence. You've got the clear support of Councillor Terry, and the clear support of the new Councillor Padja, who's immediately revealed herself to be a Labor supporter. So again, you do have the support. Councillor, Councillor, please do not assume anybody's allegiance to anything else. I'm sure- We've just seen the votes, sir. They've been up in the wall. She has voted for the Labor each time. And we've seen your votes as well. Councillor Moyes, please stick to the point. As I said, two independent Councillors, so-called from Thorp, voted with Labor, and I expect they'll continue to do that. I'm not sure maybe you'd like to clear up whether the third Thorp independent is supporting Labor from the chair. I don't know whether you want to clear that up now, but people say that you are. Some people say you aren't. Councillor Moyes. I will say this. I didn't get any of this last year when I supported the Conservative group. So we please stick to the motion, stick to the point, stop trying to interfere with the running of this Council Chamber. Just stick to the point, stop the mudslinging and just carry on. The clear point is not mudsling. It's fact that the sugariness and independence and Thorp independence are supporting the Labor group to do whatever they want. That is a fact. Sorry, thanks, Moyes. Am I Thorp independent? Am I Thorp independent? I don't know. I'm a Thorp independent. I'm not supporting anybody, so please do not include all independence. That's good. Thank you for clearing that up that you're not supporting Labor. But really, this has shown us no desire for working cross-party. The next two years, I think, will now be difficult. I think it's a shame. I think you could have done this in the proper manner. You could still have got what you wanted without having this tone within this chamber that we'll have for the next two years, independence, Labor independence, and Liberal Democrats working to do whatever you want with no challenge. I think it's a shame that you've done this, and it's going to be a problem. Thank you. Sorry, Councillor Cox. I seem to have missed you off. Come back. Please come in. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I agree entirely with what Councillor Longstar said. When I think of last year in terms of what we had done to try and bring the Council together within the space of three minutes, we just ended with grotesque chaos. Shame on everybody for doing that. Now, Mr Mayor, the leader probably believes what he said. But he knows he can put a motion forward tonight to suspend standing orders and debate it. He chose not to. He chose to go Tory bashing instead. Now, he can still do that. But he knows how bad it looks. How bad for doing it. So then we have a sidekick saying that I breached the LGA code for interfering with matters of scrutiny. But then I understand why he said that because he probably doesn't want to go the same way as his colleagues who did Councillor George and Councillor LION on 42 years time. So I probably know why he said it. It's really what we're now going to descend to. Matters of the Constitution we had cross-party dialogue, greed away forward to go like that. So then blame others and I appreciate Mr Mayor and that's why I've asked if I could be moved from where I am because I know it's disconcerting if you're in the chair when you're trying to consult with a monitoring officer to take some advice. I appreciate that. But the sad part about it is we see the laugh is sleeping. That man revels in it. He revels in the chaos. That's why he does it because he can. It's a appalling look. It's a appalling way to conduct matters. Now, I have to say, Mr Mayor, I did joke that it will be the coalition of chaos. I thought I'd give it three months, not three minutes. And that's what we've got. Rotesque chaos. And Mr Mayor, it shouldn't have happened on your first meeting. But you can thank that man for it. Not us. Now, I do believe 4.1 of the Constitution does say that the Annual Council is me making an appointment council follows after the Annual Council. So we could say really, well, you know what? This isn't an Annual Council. This was the appointment. So the appointment should have been, should be taken as they are. But look, Mr Mayor, if he doesn't want to come back, put your motion forward. So expect the standing orders to pay it tonight. I'm not forcing you to come back. You're choosing to. And if you want, if you want to choose to come back, that's your prerogative. But if you don't, so expect the standing orders and a half of the debate now. No one's stopping you. Thank you. I do something stopping him and that causes me. Councillor Campbell. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Firstly, welcome to the new members of the Chamber. It's not usually like this. It will get better. Chokes aside, I think everyone in here is probably embarrassed. I'm going to expect there will be an echo article about it later this week and we should all probably hang our heads in shame. This isn't how proper business is conducted. I don't see why we need to defer. Let's just appoint the Chair's, watch this here on paper, go through the proper purposes and go through general purposes, amend the Constitution, and then appointments next year. Change it then. I'm going to take it as not a personal slight that my name is on for one of these chairmen ships. And I hope it isn't because you just really don't want me there. But the whole point of scrutiny is best practice. It's about all of us working together, technically not political, but that's never going to happen to really betterment the city. And I don't really think we're doing the city very good justice right now. The LGA Councillor's work book on scrutiny says it's not about the executive exercising control. It's just about best practice. And it's also about holding check and balance on the executive. At the end of the day, we are here to work on behalf of the city, put things forward and actually create policies to help people. And in the last four hours, I don't think we've achieved anything like that. I actually don't have a family waiting for me at home, so I can stay here as long as we need to. But I appreciate a lot of you do. And we're going to have to come back for another meeting, despite we could have done this last Thursday and we could have suspended the standing orders then just hash it out then. But I don't think it's fair on all of you in Chamber and the officers sitting around the room to have to then listen to all of this and probably go through all this again when the motion comes in. I think it's best that we just don't defer a point for one year and please put me in chairmen because I really want to tackle angry water flooding as does Mr. Mayor. And just get it sorted through proper channels and a point whoever you want to next year. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor CUM. Councillor Wakefield. Yes, thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Mayor. I'm not one for tip of the town. I think we should just get on with the job. We're here in the independence, especially here, to work for the people in the town. But if a certain Captain James Myers wants to sling mud, he should remember the electorate has spoken with their vote and you lost four seats. You don't have a majority number. That's why we are where we are. Listen to the public. The public have spoken. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think... Sorry, Mr. Mayor. Point of order. I think the Councillor approached the dias to actually get her name put on the list. There are Councillors who have had their hand up in advance of the Councillor who decided of her own volition that she would reach protocol and come to the Mayor directly. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Councillor HARD. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think that what Council should remember is that scrutiny is critical and important for all members. Whether or not you're in opposition, whether or not you're in the administration. It's something I've personally always taken extremely seriously. My voting deckled at scrutiny meetings will show I've... Personally, I have voted against the administration because when you're in scrutiny, it comes down without political bias. It comes down to what is ahead of you. Now, I think what's getting lost here is us not realising that scrutiny is still proportional. It's proportional to this Council, and this Council is proportional to the votes of the electorate. The electorate have chosen who is sitting here out of the 51 Councillors, and we need to uphold that. Now, in terms of following a coalition that is open to all parties and groups, and we do know that the opposition parties tried just as much as us to form a administration with other groups here tonight. And I think just because they didn't choose you, it's unfair and unwarranted the phrases that you've said against the... Point of order, Mr. Mayor, what's this got to do with the motion? It's not being... We've got please stick to the motion, Mr. Mayor, thank you. It's entirely about the motion, because I'm talking about the proportionality of the scrutiny, which is the case in point. Can I please... Can I please... Can I please ask you to refrain from speaking across the Chamber? Councillor HIDE, stick to the motion, please. I believe I am, so I want to say about the proportionality of the scrutiny committees, and that's what we're talking about here. Now, regardless of the amiosity tonight here, as the Cabinet Member for Climate Environment and Waste, my door will be open to everyone in the Conservatives or any other opposition group. They can always come and talk to me about... I want to hear your ideas. I love hearing from Councillor Campbell just now that he shares my passion at doing something about the sewage releases into our beaches. So, it's not that we're closing it down. I think what has been alluded to is that, you know, presidents have been set last year, and I think having the full Council vote on this, and the full Council decide, I think, is a fair way to approach it. Councillor HIDE, I have given you enough leeway. We please stick to the motion and only the motion. OK. I apologize. I didn't realise I've deviated it at that point. So, it is unfortunate that we've had to... What we're proposing here is to delay doing this and do this through a meeting. I think it has come down to... Obviously, the president hasn't been set in terms of the leader of the opposition stepping down in good time to prepare for this meeting. And I think, hopefully, by delaying it a few days that it shouldn't interfere with the first scrutiny, which isn't for another couple of weeks, but it gives time for everyone to properly read and think about the motion. And I think rather than delaying our time and then having to rehash it at that point, we should just simply vote to delay now. Thank you. Councillor GARSTEN. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It seems like a long time ago since the leader actually introduced this item to us. I think we've got to think back to last year, where we had a memorandum of understanding, and we were running the council as an all-one-party cabinet. This year is very, very different. The cabinet is actually run by three parties. And, of course, the cabinet members are very responsible to the town, to the city, to the council, to the scrutiny committees. We want the cabinet members to be the best possible members of the council on whichever side it is, so that they know, in scrutiny, that they can answer questions. They can actually put things forward. They can say what they've been up to, rather than all the time saying, I'll give you a written answer, or deferring it to the officers to reply. The practice of having a scrutiny chair from the opposition, I think it's worked very well. The leader mentioned last year as one year, but this has been pointed out in debate. It was members of the opposition who had those positions. Councillor Gilbert mentioned earlier, and I can speak as a former chairman of the policy committee, as a former cabinet member, that policy chairs could be talked to, could be guided in certain directions. I can assure the council that that actually never happened, certainly as far as I was concerned. And as a portfolio holder over the last year, attending scrutiny, I had no worries in answering the questions, because the officers that we all rely on in this city council are so good, and the cabinet members, if they take the trouble to have briefings and regular briefings with those officers, they'll be very well clued up. One principle, and it's slightly digressing, I hope you don't room me out of order, is the Development Control Committee, where the Institute of Town Planners said and recommend very strongly that the cabinet member for planning does not sit on DC. And I'm saddened to see that the practice that was followed by Councillor Mulroney have been cabinet member for planning and sitting on DC. Councillor Jones is going to do the same thing according to these papers. It's not as democratic as it should be, Mr Mayor, but I really do think the council need to consider when this decision is made, whether we're actually talking about a cabinet of all one party or a cabinet of mixed parties. And I'd be very saddened to see that if we've got a cabinet member from another party to Labour, and they're ready to be looking at this, that aren't our Labour members, then that party having a scrutiny chair, I think that would be all wrong. So, Mr Mayor, it's a dangerous slope that we're at the top of, and I'm sorry. And I think Councillor Longstaff is a fairly new member. He hit the nail absolutely on the head and I support virtually all that he said. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Can I just say, Councillor Garson, our thoughts. You handled your portfolio very well last year. And I'm very impressed with what you did and the way you portrayed yourself at scrutiny. I'd like to thank you for that. Councillor COWEN, would you please have a right to apply? Have a reply. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I think I'll start off with why aren't we going forward with the motion that we originally wanted to bring forward. Well, it was brought to our attention that the opposition, we're going to kick up a stink about an obscure part of the Constitution, which states that constitutional changes have to come via a report of the monitoring officer. So what we are doing is we're sticking to the spirit of the Constitution and we are coming back. Councillor interjecting. Can I point of order? Councillors interjecting. Could we ask the monitoring officer to clarify? Because my understanding is, even though it does say a report, the numbers are there by the administration. They can suspend the standing orders. It's not badass kicking a fast. He could do it if he chooses if he wants to. But can I ask the monitoring officer if he would be able to clarify that for the purposes of the meeting? Thank you. Mr Mayor, through you, I don't think I would use the words kicking up a fuss. But it is my role, I believe, to try and steer a path through contentious issues by giving equal and similar advice to all parties. And that's what I believed I have done with both the administration and the opposition. Thank you. Councillor interjecting. Councillor interjecting. You've had your point of order. Councillor interjecting. The other part was he's actually the legal point here. He's because I've been accused of wanting to kick up a fuss. I'm not disputing Ms Seis' advice that she's given. What I'm asking is Ms Seis be able to impart to this Chamber what can and can't be done? I think the monitoring officer answered the question quite independently. Councillor CUMMING, will you please carry on? Thank you, Mr Mayor. We did want to bring this forward originally through a report via the monitoring officer. But as we were not in the administration at the time, it wasn't possible, despite the, as Councillor Gilbert said, that there were presidencies. However, Councillor Moyes said that wanted to set a tone. Well, I think a tone has been set disrespecting the Mayor, personal attacks, all coming from one side of the Chamber. Councillor COCK said that last year he tried to bring the Council together. Well, he did that by organising to ostracise the entire labour group from every committee, chair, ship and outside body that they could. As Councillor Gilbert said, that was not in the spirit of the Constitution. I'll just stick to the motion, yeah, please. Well, it's right of reply, Mr Mayor, so I'm responding to the comments that were made. Councillor CUMMING was right. We could have done this last Thursday. But the leader of the Council, who has thrown around terms like egotist tonight, decided that only he could save the Football Club, so would hang on. That's a matter of public record. Councillor Longstaff is correct. This meeting is about appointments, and that's what this motion is about. It's about changing the Constitution so that we can actually set appointments who are going to hold the Administration to account in the correct manner and not see it as best practice guidance and LJ guidance as de facto opposition. We have a long memory of this current opposition using scrutiny as a means to frustrate the will of the Council, frustrate the Administration and stop things from happening. Had they not behaved in the egregious manner that they did for four years, perhaps Spades might have got in the ground on Better Queen's Way. And I think they should hang the heads in shame for how they behaved. Councillor BUCK talks about technicalities around the point that Councillor Gillwood made, but completely misses the point. He says that it's 19% of councils. I know that details are not Councillor BUCK's strong point, but it clearly says here, 60 unitary authorities, not all authorities, unitary authorities, because it's very important because of the type of structure that we run which is a cabinet system. I agree with everything that Councillor Gilbert and Councillor Nevin said. I can't really comment too much on what Councillor McMahon said, but I have had the great fortune to never be a colleague of hers. Councillor Courtney complains about there being a motion with no notice or only 17 minutes notice, but we're moving a motion without notice. The fact that you've got notice is an improvement. Councillor Nevin also complaining about the lack of notice. The exact same situation. I'll finish, Mr Mayor, with what Councillor Nevin said, that Councillor COWEN doesn't know what it's going to do. Well, I know exactly what I'm going to do. I work with my colleagues here across the Chamber to fix the mess that you've left and build a city that we can all be proud of. That's what we're going to do. So, I know exactly what we're going to do. And the first order of business is to vote through for all of our committees, apart from vice chairs and chairs of scrutiny, subject to a report from the monitoring officer which will come forward as soon as possible at the behest of the Mayor, and I urge colleagues to vote for our motion. I'll now give the hand over to the Chief Executive to organise a vote. Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. Okay, we're now going to be moving over to the vote. So, in terms of two options, you've got your cards in front of you. So, in terms of number one for yes, which is to carry the motion for the deferral of said item of the chairs and number two to vote against that. So, one for the to carry the motion, two not to carry the motion. [ Pause ] Okay, I'm now going to close the vote. So, the outcome of the vote is to carry the motion, yes is 28, no is 18, so therefore the motion is carried. Mr Mayor, to make life easy for you and I think it might help expediate the meeting. I believe that there are some contests, certainly for the outside bodies, where there are contests and there are conservative members will withdraw all of those. So, I do believe that should make then the paper to be able to go through seeing this with all the other appointments, Ms. Mayor. Thank you, Councillor COX, that's noted. [ Pause ] Right. The Council had reported report of the executive director strategy and change which deals with the arrangements for the administration 2024 and associated matters. I will now invite the Leader of the Council to address the Council to confirm his cabinet appointments and the associated arrangements. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Firstly, I'd like to say I'm honoured to accept the post-leader, I thank colleagues, friends, family and my children for their support and look forward to working with my new colleagues within the joint administration. I'll reflect slightly before I move forward. Last year, my mum attended Mayormaking and expressed her immense pride that a kid like me from my background having spent time in care with additional needs and a disability could lead a political group and perhaps even be Leader of the Council one day. Sadly, we would lose her shortly after, but I recall saying to her that if it happens, it wouldn't be a moment about the Leader of the Council, but a moment about our city and the people are elected to serve. And that's the spirit in which this administration will govern. We will take decisions not in our political interest, but in the interest of the entire city of South End, our businesses, community and faith groups, charity schools, residents of today and tomorrow. And our mission, our clear objective, is to give the Council security and stability to deliver for our residents, to restore pride in our city, and that is what we shall do. I thank the previous Cabinet for their service, and I hope that they and every other Councillor will work with us in the spirit of genuine collaboration on this mission. We face significant and numerous challenges, but we will rise to them. We inherit a difficult financial position with services barely clinging on, staff morale at an ebb, a waste contract in disarray, and a football club waiting with baited breath for news from this Chamber. However, Mr. Mayor, thanks in part to our budget amendments earlier this year, we also inherit opportunities. The opportunity to build a city we can be proud of. The opportunity to improve street cleaning, grass cutting and pot hole fixing. The opportunity to bring more visitors to our city, to improve and modernise services, set a better culture, breakdown barriers and contribute towards a better South End. Now, these are challenging times, locally, nationally, regionally, and I've appointed a Cabinet with the duties as circulated that draws on the strengths and experience from across the independent Liberal, Democrat and labour groups to meet those challenges. A Cabinet that is bursting with talent, dynamism, competence and aspiration that support and value Council staff to improve the Council's communication, policy development, public engagement and financial management so we can better deliver on the priorities of residents. We know that the finances must be carefully managed and we will do that. We will never make unfunded promises or decisions that put the Council's financial stability and jeopardy. However, we will also not entertain the idea of finding savings in improper places. That is why our first act as a new administration has been to scrap a Cabinet post to save this authority money. And our second act is to say that this administration will not even contemplate any proposals to close libraries, family centres or dementia community support services whilst we hold office. I personally pledge that this administration will operate in a completely fair and transparent manner. That's why our joint administration agreement, which details our shared priorities and vision, will be published in full. We know the task ahead of us is big and we thank the residents of South End for placing their trust in us to deliver for them. We will work hard to make South End an even greater place to live, work and visit. That work starts now and I passionately believe with this incredible Cabinet behind me and fantastic backbenchers that South End's proudest days lie ahead. Thank you. [Applause] Can I now ask you to note the political make up of the Council? Note the details of the Cabinet members and substitutes, including the Deputy Leader, who have been appointed by the Leader and the responsibilities of all nine Cabinet members. These details have been tabled this evening this day. Note the Leader's appointments at Cabinet Committee and substitutes tabled this evening. Let's be. That part three scheduled two of the Constitution be amended to reflect changes needed to the Cabinet working parties and by the addition of the Council Resource Panel, terms of reference for the Panel have been circulated this evening. That authority be delegated to the Chief Executive to confirm the appointments to the working parties, panels and forums, et cetera, in accordance with the nominations of the group leaders. To endorse the Council's Constitution, including the scheme of delegation in part three, schedule three, agree to report. [inaudible] It's just point of clarification here. I appreciate it's on the recommendations when it looks at the Member Resources Panel and to agree the membership. But there's been no consultation with any of the group leaders on what the membership should look like. We've just got it here as a face of complete. What I was going to ask is would people be mindful or be minded rather than disagree because it's the first time that people have seen it on the night that this could be done in a considered way because it looks at here who the appointments should be for others. But it says in there that it's down to the group leader to decide. And I just think that's odd. I'll let the Chief Executive reply to that. Through the Chair, I was just reflecting that that would seem a reasonable approach for us to take with that in terms of making sure that those terms of reference are then circulated round and agreed in that way. So I think that's fine. Thank you. I do appreciate the Chief Executive's saying that. But does that also relate to the appointments because it's actually prescribing who should be on there? And I think that should be the result of the group leaders to appoint. Certainly for those other roles. Through the Chair. So I think in terms of the minute, as I'm just looking over at the clock, if we can just make sure that that is appropriately reflected, just to say that we will take that element out of the final approval that goes into the minutes so that we can then get that circulated and approve the later point. We now have appointments of Councillors and substitutes to regulatory and committees, licensing, subcommittee, C, standards committee and audit committee. The list of nominations of Councillors and substitute Councillors to the regulatory and scoot to the committees have been tabled as lists C. This has been prepared in accordance with the statute of requirements regarding committee proportionality. Can we agree to the list? Five. Appointment of chairs and vice chairs of regularly, regulatory, committees, licensing, subcommittee, audit committee and standards committee. The Council has now asked to appoint a chair and vice chair to each of the regulatory committees and other committees. This C sets out proposed chairs and vice chairs. But with the exception of scruity chairs and vice chairs doing agree to do so. Agree the list. Six. Appointments of Councillors and substitutes for traffic regulations work in party. The list of nominations of Councillors and substitute Councillors to the traffic regulations work in party has been tabled as list D. Agree the list. Appointments to outside bodies. The list of nominations of Councillors. The list of nominations of Councillors and substitutes to outside bodies have been tabled as list E. In the case of what Councillor Cox, the leader of the opposition has said he has removed all nominations and therefore the list is as stands. Before I ask the Council to agree, can I ask the Council to agree to rest the requirements on the list? I will now ask the Chief Executive to conduct a vote for the contested lack of contested positions. These were the Council. Thank you very much. So as outlined by Councillor Cox with the withdrawal, it will just be the names, the remaining names on the list. So are we happy to agree as outlined with that withdrawal as mentioned? Agree? The Council has before it the Council calendar of meetings for the municipal year 2425. There were two proposal amendments as follows. Cabinet, meetings to start at 6pm with the exception of the meeting on the 24th of June, which will commence at 7pm. Development control committee, meetings to start at 5pm. Agree the calendar of meetings as amended? That concludes the business for this evening. Please stop the webcast.