The Constitution Committee met to discuss potential changes to council meeting procedures, including the order of agenda items, handling of public and member questions, and the process for council motions. They agreed to recommend changes to the council regarding the order of items on the agenda for ordinary council meetings, and delegated authority to the Monitoring Officer to bring recommendations to the council on amendments to the constitution regarding public questions and council motions. The committee also recommended reducing the membership of the Environment Scrutiny Committee to nine members.

Order of Agenda for Ordinary Council Meetings

The committee agreed to recommend several changes to the agenda for ordinary council meetings, aiming to improve the flow and focus of discussions.

The proposed changes include:

• Changing 'or' to 'and' in item 2.1.3 of the [Agenda for Ordinary Meetings of Council][https://glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/documents/s110248/Agenda%20for%20Ordinary%20Meetings%20of%20Council.pdf], to make more use of announcements by the Chair of the Council, Leader of the Council, Cabinet Members and Chief Executive.
• Moving member questions (item 2.1.8) up the agenda to follow public questions (item 2.1.4).
• Adding an item after member questions to Receive and ask questions on reports from Cabinet as appropriate.

Councillor Colin Hay, Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Finance, Assets & Transformation, who was elected as Chair for the meeting, had outlined several changes he wished to propose, including a written report from the cabinet following the member questions item that also allowed for councillors to ask questions without notice, removing the Corporate Parenting Report from the agenda, and moving scrutiny reports further up the agenda, before motions.

During the discussion, one member cautioned against changing too much too soon, before new members had a chance to experience council meetings. There was also concern that the changes could lead to council meetings running much longer. Other members welcomed the ability to ask more questions of the cabinet earlier in the meeting, and the value of moving motions to the afternoon to ensure members and the public were aware of council business.

Council, Committee and Cabinet Questions

The committee discussed potential changes to the provisions for public and member questions at meetings, as outlined in the [Council Questions - discussion paper][https://glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/documents/s110247/Council%20Questions%20-%20discussion%20paper.pdf].

The key point of discussion was whether to place a limit on the number of questions an individual or organisation could ask, and whether to retain, reduce, or extend the overall time limit for questions. Councillor Colin Hay suggested that the timing for asking questions for cabinet meetings was quite restrictive, and that for items on the agenda, officers and members should be well briefed.

Some members expressed concern that limiting questions could be seen as not being transparent, while others argued that individuals could dominate the item with a large number of supplementary questions, preventing others from participating. Some members proposed limiting written questions submitted by members of the public, while others suggested grouping questions into sets of three to help coordinate the asking of supplementary questions.

The committee agreed to focus on limiting the number of supplementary questions that could be asked by members of the public, to ensure the item did not become unduly long, and to consider imposing a time limit. It was felt that member questions should remain as they were at this time. Further discussion on the potential impacts of reducing the numbers of written questions was scheduled for the next Constitution Committee meeting.

The committee resolved to delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer to bring recommendations to the council on amendments to the constitution that would:

• Limit the number of supplementary questions that any individual member of the public is entitled to ask to three.
• Provide the chair with discretion to allow further supplementaries if time remains once all members of the public have exercised that right.

Review of Arrangements for Motions

The committee reviewed the rules concerning council motions, particularly how the order of motions was determined, and the time limit for debating motions, as detailed in the [Council Motions - discussion paper][https://glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/documents/s110249/Council%20Motions%20-%20discussion%20paper.pdf].

Councillor Colin Hay provided the example of Gloucester City Council, where motions are taken in turn by political group. Councillor Jeremy Hilton provided further background on how groups were asked to select their preferred motion to be considered, which he felt had helped reduce the number of motions received and allowed for more topical motions to be put forward on the agenda.

It was clarified that groups could submit multiple motions for a meeting, but each political group would have a greater chance of having their preferred motion heard within the two-hour time limit. One member expressed concern that this would reduce opportunities for submitting motions, while other members provided examples of how it might help to ensure time on the agenda for all groups.

There was a discussion on how independent and Labour motions would be handled in the rotation process, with assurances that any members not aligned to a political group would be treated as a single group for the purposes of this rule, and that in the event that there is more than one member that is unaligned to a political group, the slot would be taken by them in turns.

The committee discussed the two-hour limit for council motions and the possibility of amending Procedural Standing Order (PSO) 10.9 to allow the standing order to be suspended, which would also require a change to PSO 11.1.16 and 23.1. One member suggested trialling the changes already made before looking to implement this change, and there was a suggestion to allow an extension of 30 minutes. It was agreed to discuss this further at a future Constitution Committee meeting.

The committee resolved to delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer to bring recommendations to the council on amendments to the constitution that would change the way in which the order of motions is determined.

Environment Scrutiny Committee

The committee was informed that historically the Environment Scrutiny Committee had nine members, but in May 2023 the membership was increased to eleven. This had been a pragmatic decision arising from changes to the political balance of the council. Following the 2025 election, political balance could be achieved whilst reducing the number of places on the committee back to nine, as detailed in the [Environment Committee][https://glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/documents/s110251/Environment%20Committee.pdf] report.

The committee resolved to recommend to the council that the membership of the Environment Committee be reduced to nine members.

Monitoring Officer Changes

The committee noted the changes as detailed in the [MO Decision report - MO change to the constitution - Cabinet Portfolios - May 2025][https://glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/documents/s110083/MO%20Decision%20report%20-%20MO%20change%20to%20the%20constitution%20-%20Cabinet%20Portfolios%20-%20May%202025.pdf] and [MO Decision report - MO change to the constitution - Cabinet Portfolios - June 2025 2][https://glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/documents/s110084/MO%20Decision%20report%20-%20MO%20change%20to%20the%20constitution%20-%20Cabinet%20Portfolios%20-%20June%202025%202.pdf] reports. These reports detailed changes to Cabinet portfolios.