Agenda item
Health and Wellbeing Board Governance
This report provides details of the decisions taken by Full Council and invites the Health and Wellbeing Board to consider its membership and voting options.
Minutes:
Andrew Davies, Policy and Performance Officer introduced the report detailing the background to the establishment of the board and its functions. He clarified that voting regulations under the Local Government Act 1972 for section 102 Committees had been suspended enabling partnership members the ability to vote. It was further clarified that the purpose of the report was to consult the Board on the proposed governance arrangements which would be fed back to Full Council for final determination.
Rob Larkman, CCG Chief Executive was pleased that three CCG members had been given voting rights but highlighted the disproportionality in relation to the number of voting members from the Council, and hoped to see greater balance on a partnership Board. Rob Larkman noted the disproportionality in relation to quoracy and the requirement for three Councillors and only one CCG representative to be present in order for a meeting to take place.
Councillor R Moher hoped that all deliberations would end in a consensus to ensure efficient partnership working for the residents of Brent.
Councillor HB Patel highlighted that the Board was a collaboration and felt that Brent Health Watch should also be given a vote to ensure fairness. He continued to state that the Board was an equal partnership and that all attendees should have voting rights except Council Officers.
Councillor R Moher noted that there were certain regulations governing committees but reiterated that the proposals before the board were a framework in which to work, but that the Board would have failed in delivering the best services for resident’s should a vote be needed.
Daksha Chauhan-Keys, representing Health Watch, echoed Councillor HB Patel’s comments and highlighted that it was the discretion of the Local Authority to allocate votes and as an equal partner felt that Health Watch should not be excluded, particularly as it was a collaborative board.
Rob Larkman noted that voting arrangements were symbolic however felt that by allowing three CCG voting members, Health Watch should also be given a vote to present a clear message that it was a collaborative, partnership board. Councillor R Moher drew the Board’s attention to the potential for additional members to be appointed at a later stage.
Councillor HB Patel highlighted the statutory membership and that voting rights had been expanded beyond those who were statutory members and if the membership was expanded further then voting rights could be considered. He continued to highlight that by having voting rights for all it showed a collaborative partnership arrangement for the residents.
Kathy Robinson, Senior Lawyer, reiterated that the discussion that took place would be presented to Full Council which would take a formal decision on voting arrangements at their meeting in September. She highlighted that the Health and Wellbeing Board was a Committee of the Council; although the statute provided for specific unusual arrangements, it left voting rights at the discretion of the Local Authority. The Senior Lawyer drew the Board’s attention to the potential for the Board to make Executive decisions which were ordinarily voted upon by elected members of the Council. The Council’s proposal was to achieve a balance of voting rights as far as possible, while preserving the Council’s position on voting if required.
Councillor HB Patel noted that although the decision on voting rights was for Full Council, the Board was able to make recommendations.. Councillor R Moher informed the Board that all views would be fed back to Full Council on 9 September 2013 and details on Council’s decision reported to the Board at the following meeting.
Jo Olson highlighted that CCG may wish to review the governance arrangements of the Board should Pioneer Status be granted and decisions on budget spending be delegated to the Health and Wellbeing Board. Councillor R Moher felt it was unlikely that the Board would be required to make decisions regarding the Pioneer budget. It was highlighted that the Chief Executive was a non statutory member of the Health and Wellbeing Board.
RESOLVED;
(i) That the report be noted
That the views of the Board on voting rights be reported back to Full Council to inform the decision making process.
Supporting documents: