Public excluded from yet another key Brent Council discussion

The KPMG auditor is still investigating  objections to Brent Council's 2015-16 accounts by six local residents over the payment to former Director of HR Cara Davani LINK  and PcW has issued a 'limited assurance' verdict on Brent's Planning procedures LINK and drawn attention to potential for fraud.

Given that context there is  surely public interest in Brent's interal audit and investigation arrangements but the public have been  excluded from hearing consideration of these matters at the next meeting of the General Purposes Committee on January 30th.

The General Purposes Committee has hithertoo been made up of members of the Brent Cabinet, plus one opposition member, an arrangement that has itself drawn criticism.  The agenda item on the Council's website today still includes Cllr Mashari rather than her successor Cllr Tom Miller. Cllr Reg Colwill is the opposition member. Any change of membership will  have to be approved by Full Council at the January 23rd Meeting.

Does Councillor Butt have too much power?

-->
Guest blog by Philip Grant

The article below was submitted as a comment on the blog about the possible delay in filling the Stronger Communities Lead Member role on Brent’s Cabinet LINK t
I am repeating it here, for comment and discussion, as part of Local Democracy Week.

In my earlier comment, I explained why I believe that Cllr. Butt is within his rights, under Brent’s Constitution, not to appoint a new Lead Member for Stronger Communities straight away, but to take on the responsibilities of that role in addition to his role as Leader. This does not mean that I believe it is the right (i.e. correct) thing for him to do. Overall, I believe that Cllr. Butt has too much power, and some of it is a result of an abuse of Brent Council’s Constitution.

That Constitution (in its own words) ‘…sets out how the Council operates, how decisions are made and the procedures which are followed to ensure that decision making is efficient, transparent and accountable to local people. Some of the procedures are required by law, while others are a matter for the Council. The Constitution is divided into 8 Parts. …. In particular, Parts 3 and 4 set out the rules governing the conduct of the Council’s business and which part of the Council is responsible for various functions.’

“Responsibility for Functions” is an important area, which should mean that there are “checks and balances” to ensure that power is shared across the Council, so that no single person or group within it has too much (to guard against that power being abused). The Constitution gives the Leader, or the Leader together with the Cabinet, considerable powers, but there are also ‘functions which cannot be exercised by the Cabinet’, ‘functions not to be the sole responsibility of the Cabinet’ and ‘functions that may only be exercised by Full Council’.

One area of particular concern is the General Purposes Committee, which ‘carries out a number of functions on which the Cabinet cannot take decisions, including public rights of way, setting the Council Tax base and approving staffing matters’.  The committee has eight members, and the Constitution used to say that at least one of these must be a member of the Executive (the previous title for the Cabinet). That proviso, which gave a very strong hint that most of the committee should be made up of back-bench councillors, has been removed, and for the past few years seven of the eight members have been Cabinet members, with the official Opposition Leader as the eighth.

Cllr. Butt is Chair of the General Purposes Committee, and of its Senior Staff Appointments Sub-Committee. This has given him considerable influence over the Council’s senior staffing structure, who is appointed to the Senior Officer posts, and the terms on which they are appointed. There are suspicions that, during the time that Christine Gilbert was interim Chief Executive and Cara Davani was HR Director, the Leader of the Council may have been complicit in some of their alleged misconduct over staffing matters.

The appointment of the Council’s Head of Paid Service (Chief Executive) is one of the functions which can only be exercised by Full Council, and not by the Cabinet or the Leader. Despite this, Cllr. Butt was able to appoint Christine Gilbert in September 2012 as ‘interim Chief Executive’, supposedly for a few months while the Council advertised for and appointed a permanent Chief Executive. In June 2013, Full Council was asked to extend Christine Gilbert’s role as interim Chief Executive – it agreed to do so, but only for a FIXED TERM which should have ended in June 2014.

The permanent post was still not advertised, and at the meeting in September 2014, Cllr. Butt extended Christine Gilbert’s tenure (eventually until September 2015) without seeking the consent of Full Council. The minutes recorded:

‘The Leader referred to the decision taken in June 2013 regarding the appointment of a new Chief Executive.  He stated that the external auditors were reporting back on how the Council was operating and whilst there was progress being made, stability within the Council would enable further progress to be made.  The current arrangements would therefore remain in place until a recruitment process began in the new year which would tie in with the launch of the new Borough Plan.’

Does Cllr. Butt have too much power? I would suggest that he does, and that the Council’s Constitutional Working Group, chaired by its properly appointed Chief Executive, Carolyn Downs, should consider ways to ensure that the functions of the General Purposes Committee and its sub-committees are carried out independently of the Council Leader and the Cabinet.

Philip Grant.

Kenton Conservatives confirmed as official opposition on Brent Council

It appeared that there might be further consideration of which of the Conservative groups to recognise as the principal opposition during the pretty confusing Annual General Meeting Council meeting on May 20th and resolution before the General Purposes Committee on May 27th was mentioned. A constitutional working party was mentioned.

However I have today confirmed with Council officers that no additional business has been added to the GP Committee agenda  for tomorrow which is below:

1 Declarations of personal and prejudicial interests

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, any relevant financial or other interest in the items on this agenda.

2 Minutes of the previous meeting

3 Matters arising

4 Deputations (if any)

5 Representation of Political Groups on Committees

At its meeting on 20 May 2015 the Council reviewed the representation of political groups on its main committees. As soon as practicable after such a review, those committees are required to conduct a review of the representation of political groups on any sub-committees they may have. This report sets out the rules to be applied during the course of the review.

6 Appointments to Sub-Committees / Outside Bodies

7 Pensions Board membership

The committee will consider nominations for membership of the Pensions Board and a recommendation from officers to appoint an independent Chair.

8 Any other urgent business

The officer stated:

I have not been notified at this time of any other urgent business to be considered at this meeting.   I can also confirm that the principal opposition party was agreed at the annual council meeting on 20 May as the Conservative Group, comprising Cllrs Kansagra, Colwill and Maurice.

Cara Davani presenting Brent's Equalities Strategy on Wednesday

Regular readers will perhaps find it ironic that Wednesday's General Purposes Committee will be considering reports from Cara Davani, Director of Human Resources at Brent Council, on Equalities Strategy and Equalities Policy.

Brent Council has taken no action regarding Cara Davani's role in the Employment Tribunal's finding that Brent Council discriminated against an employee on grounds of race and was responsible for victimisation and constructive dismissal.  They again failed to take action a second time when the Tribunal found no grounds for the Appeal that Brent Council launched.

The last General Purposes Committee heard a report from Cllr Michael Pavey on his inquiry into the role each person had in Brent Council 'to make it the best possible place to work' - not an inquiry into the Human Resources department as such. LINK

The latest argument I have heard regarding the lack of action is that this is not a matter for councillors but for Christine Gilbert, Acting Chief Executive Officer.

The General Purposes Committee consists of the Cabinet minus Cllr Mashari, plus Cllr Kansagra, leader of the official Conservative opposition. Consideration of thr Equalities issue would perhaps carry more weight and be more robust if some Cabinet members stepped aside in favour of substitutes who are members of the BAME community.

 The Agenda blurb on the Equalities Strategy says:

The new Equality Strategy 2015 – 2019 sets out a refreshed vision and approach underpinned by the values of fairness, respect for people, valuing diversity and excellence in all our services. The strategy sets out Brent’s determination to be an exemplar of good practice in equality, diversity and human rights by achieving an ‘excellent’ assessment in the Equality Framework for Local Government in 2015 

The Action Plan includes the following outcomes:

·      All council employees receive equal pay for work of equal value

·      Progress towards a living wage for all who live and work in Brent

·      Equality is integral to all employment processes and practices

·      The council workforce is representative of the local community at all levels

·      Increased proportion of BAME senior managers

·      Our employees feel engaged in the development and work of the council

·      Positive outcomes from staff surveys