The Standards Committee of Hertfordshire County Council met on Wednesday 14 January 2026 to approve the terms of reference for a review of the council's Standing Orders and other aspects of its Constitution. The committee agreed to establish a Constitution Working Group to undertake this review, with nominations for its members being put forward by political group leaders.

Hertfordshire County Council Standing Orders Review

The committee approved the proposed approach to reviewing the Hertfordshire County Council Standing Orders and other relevant aspects of the Constitution. This review will be undertaken by a newly established Constitution Working Group (CWG). The CWG will consist of 13 members, with representation allocated according to political proportionality: 5 Liberal Democrats, 3 Conservatives, 2 Reform members, 1 Green, 1 Labour, and 1 Independent member. The group's terms of reference, which were attached to the report, outline the purpose of the review as ensuring the council's Constitution is legally compliant, clear, accessible, and reflective of best practice, particularly in a no overall control environment.

During the discussion, Councillor Alex Curtis, who was permitted to participate in the debate but not vote, raised the issue of the chairmanship of the working group, suggesting that the process for its selection should be clarified. It was generally agreed that the working group itself should decide on its chair.

Further discussion focused on the working arrangements for the CWG. Councillor Ruth Brown inquired about the possibility of holding meetings online to facilitate attendance, and the officer confirmed that as it is a working group, not a formal committee, online meetings would be permissible. Councillor John Hale expressed a preference against the use of substitutes for working group members, arguing for continuity in discussions. Councillor Alex Curtis suggested that a hybrid format, allowing for both online and in-person participation, would be appropriate. Ultimately, the decision on working arrangements was left to the discretion of the working group itself.

The review is expected to take at least three months, with the possibility of fast-tracking certain aspects, such as the Standing Orders relating to meetings, to ensure proposals are brought forward at pace. The emerging proposals from the CWG will be submitted to the Standards Committee for assurance before being recommended to Full Council for final approval. The report also noted that external advice may be sought from organisations such as the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS) and specialist legal experts like Bevan Brittan.

The committee voted to approve the proposed approach to the review, and the terms of reference were carried.