The Standards Committee of Hertfordshire Council met on Friday 8 May 2026 to discuss proposed revisions to the Council's constitution. The committee considered proposed amendments to three annexes of the Council's constitution: Annex 6 (Council Standing Orders), Annex 12 (Standing Orders for Regulatory and Other Committees), and Annex 28 (Substitution Scheme). These revisions were developed by a cross-party Constitutional Working Group, which had met three times to review the documents.

Proposed Revisions to the Council's Constitution

The proposed changes to Annex 6, the Council Standing Orders, included extensive reordering and amendments to align with the Model Council Procedure Rules. Key changes involved clarifying the timing and business of annual, ordinary, and extraordinary meetings, increasing the timeframe for issuing meeting summonses from five to six clear working days, and defining the quorum as one quarter of the whole number of members. New provisions were introduced regarding the number of rejected questions to be recorded in minutes, the limit on written questions to Full Council meetings based on group size, and the time for lodging motions and amendments. The time limit for the mover of a motion was increased to five minutes, and new provisions were added concerning previous decisions and motions, voting for appointments, and the recording of attendance. Clarifications were also made regarding members' and public conduct, and the suspension and amendment of Council Procedure Rules.

Amendments to Annex 12, the Standing Orders for Regulatory and Other Committees, included referencing members of the committee instead of political group spokespersons and updating the location of meetings. A change was made to SOC9, stating that motions must be relevant to some matter within the Committee's terms of reference, with the removal of the requirement to be relevant to an item on the agenda. SOC11 was amended to give the Chair discretion to allow an increased number of and time for representations at the Development Control Committee. Provisions regarding disorder were amended to replicate those in Annex 6.

Annex 28, the Substitution Scheme, was amended to include a new paragraph proposing that the Council's Substitution Scheme be reviewed and approved by full Council each year at the Annual Meeting. This addition aims to ensure adherence to legal requirements and follows advice from the Council's external legal advisers, Bevan Brittan.

During the discussion, Councillor Ruth Brown raised a point about the definition of a meeting for attendance purposes, noting that cabinet panels did not count towards attendance records. It was explained that this was bound by legal and lawful requirements, specifically referencing the Local Government Act 1972, and was beyond the remit of the working group. Councillor David Barnard shared a personal experience where this distinction had impacted him. Councillor Alexander Curtis further clarified that cabinet panels were considered informal bodies rather than formal structures like ward forums or statutory committees, and legislative change would be required to alter this.

Nicholas Moss, an Independent Person, proposed several minor amendments to Standing Order 24 (Members' Conduct) within Annex 6 to enhance clarity and consistency. These included adding at meetings of the council after Members' conduct, clarifying that the code of conduct applies to members when acting in that capacity, suggesting moving the reference to turning off electronic devices to the top of the section, and refining the wording regarding a councillor being heard further to explicitly state in the opinion of the chair. He also suggested ensuring consistency in terminology, such as using carried for motions, and reordering suspension and adjournment to reflect a logical sequence. The committee found these amendments to be acceptable and beneficial for clarity.

The committee resolved to recommend the proposed changes to Annexes 6, 12, and 28 of the Council's Constitution to full Council for approval, incorporating the minor amendments suggested by Nicholas Moss. The report noted that there were no material financial implications arising from these recommendations.