1.        PURPOSE OF REPORT AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1     At their meeting of 3 November 2015 the Democracy Committee agreed to carry out a review of Outside Bodies with a view to aligning them with the relevant Service Committee.

1.2     The Committee agreed to an initial review being carried out to establish how useful Councillor membership was to the Outside Bodies.  Once this stage had been reported back the Committee would decide on the appropriateness of Member involvement in continuing the review, for example through a working group.

1.3     This report provides details of the responses to a questionnaire sent to Outside Bodies as well as other information to help the Committee decide how and if they wish to proceed with the review.

2.        INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

2.1     A survey of Outside Bodies was carried out during November and December 2015 to establish how useful Councillor membership was to the Outside Bodies.  Two reminders to respond to the survey were sent.

2.2     Maidstone Borough Council supports 41 Outside Bodies.  Of the 41 the following were not included in the survey:

Table 1

2.3     The following table shows the 22 Outside Bodies that were surveyed and whether or not they responded to the survey.  Of the 22, 14 responded:

Table 2

2.4     The results of the responses received are attached as Appendix A. The full response from Citizens Advice Bureau is attached as Appendix B.

2.5     Where the Outside Body’s Councillor member is different in Appendix B to our records this had been noted in brackets in the final column.  The Outside Body has been contacted to highlight this.

2.6     The Constitution provides details of some links that Chairmen of Service Committees should make with Outside Bodies.  These are outlined below:

Table 3

2.7     The Council provides financial support to the Citizens Advice Bureau and provides premises for Maidstone Sea Scouts at a significantly reduced rent.  The Council provides administrative support to six Outside Bodies shown in Table 1.

2.8     To date the following Outside Bodies have vacancies, the numbers in brackets indicates the total number of Member places on the Outside Body:

o   Action with Communities in Rural Kent – one (2)

o   Maidstone-Beauvais Twinning Association – two (4)

o   Relate West and Mid Kent – one (1)

o   South East Employers – one (2)

2.9     The Constitution states that the Council has responsibility for appointing councillors to sit on Outside Bodies, except for those appointments which are delegated to the Democracy Committee. The functions of the Democracy Committee include “To appoint Council nominees to outside bodies…as appropriate”. There is therefore no clarity in the Constitution about which Committee has responsibility for the appointments.  However, it is recommended to the Committee for the purposes of this review, that if it recommends that the Council withdraws support for particular Outside Bodies, it refers the final decision to Council.

3.        AVAILABLE OPTIONS

3.1     The Committee could decide to do nothing.  The administration of Outside Bodies is minimal in terms of officer time except at the beginning of the municipal year.  However, at the present time there is no formal process linking the Outside Bodies and the work of the Committees or the Council as a whole.  This could have an adverse effect on the Council’s relationships with Outside Bodies and the effectiveness of the relationship. There is also lack of clarity in the Constitution about responsibility for appointing councillors to Outside Bodies.

3.2     The Committee could decide to continue with the review and establish which Outside Bodies link with the Council’s priorities and Service Committees of the Council and consider withdrawing Member involvement where links are tentative or unproductive for both parties.  The review could also create a formal communication process between the Council, Member representatives of Outside Bodies and the Outside Body;  for example by providing a regular item on the agenda for the relevant committee for Outside Body updates.

4.        PREFERRED OPTION AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1     The preferred option is 3.2 above.

4.2     It would appear there is a considerable amount of Member time and energy is spent supporting Outside Bodies with no formal reporting process between the Member and the rest of the Council.  Setting up a formal, non-onerous, reporting process would benefit both the Council and the Outside Body.

4.3     A continuation of the review would provide further information to help the Committee decide which, if any, Outside Body memberships are dormant or unproductive and perhaps warrant the withdrawal of Council support.  The absence of a response to the survey should not necessarily be considered a lack of engagement on the part of the Outside Body.

5.       NEXT STEPS: COMMUNICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION

5.1     If the Committee decide to extend the review this could be carried out and the results reported back to the Committee at a meeting in March.  If the Committee decide to withdraw support for any Outside Bodies this would allow time for any recommendations to be presented to Full Council on 13 April 2016

6.       CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS

7.        REPORT APPENDICES

The following documents are to be published with this report and form part of the report:

·         Appendix A – Outside Body Responses to survey

·         Appendix B – Full survey response from Citizens Advice Bureau