Agenda item

To receive, in accordance with Standing Order 27(g), a report from the Corporate Director of Finance & Resources outlining proposed changes to the Constitution following review.

(Agenda republished to include an updated version of the attached report on 19 May 2026)

The Mayor the moved on to invite Councillor Muhammed Butt (as Leader of the Council) to introduce the report from the Corporate Director of Finance & Resources detailing a number of proposed changes to the Constitution.  In moving the changes outlined within the report, Councillor Muhammed Butt advised that they incorporated a necessary and targeted review of the Constitution prompted by the new political make-up of the Council following the May borough elections.  Referring to the existing Standing Orders relating to the submission of advance notice written questions and Group motions at Council meetings, members were advised these had needed to be updated to reflect the new political composition of the Council with the aim to ensure the arrangements remained fair, workable and fit for purpose ahead of the first ordinary Full Council meeting in July.

Confirmation was provided that the report had not been intended to present a wider annual review of the Constitution, with the outcome of that process scheduled to be reported back to Council in July, and instead reflected a narrower and more urgent need to ensure the basic operating rules for questions and motions recognised the new political balance on the Council.  Referring to the proposals relating to the allocation of motions and advance notice written questions, Councillor Muhammed Butt advised that the arrangements proposed had followed initial consultation with Group Leaders and involved an allocation reflecting the politically balance between Groups on the Council.  It was felt the approach outlined would not only provide a clear and fair route allowing Groups to continue to bring matters forward for debate, but would also ensure Council meetings remain manageable and focused whilst allowing members across the Council to hold the administration to account in a way that remained proportionate, practical and reflective of the new circumstances in which the Council was operating.

In commending the recommended changes to Council, Councillor Muhammed Butt ended by assuring members that the proposals reflected a desire to ensure the Council could continue to conduct its business effectively and fairly and would not prejudge the broader review to come in July.

The Mayor then opened the debate inviting other members to speak on the report, with the following contributions made.

In opening the debate Councillor Mitchell advised of an amendment she was seeking to move at this stage of the meeting under Standing Order 42 (a) in relation to the Council’s scrutiny arrangements proposing the establishment of a third Scrutiny Committee, with responsibility for housing-related matters.  In moving the amendment, Councillor Mitchell began by highlighting concern at developments during the meeting relating to the appointment of the Leader and Minority Administration, facilitated through the support of the Conservative Group rather than any genuine collaboration of cross party partnership.  These were, she felt indicative of wider shortcomings in the current political arrangements in failing to reflect the percentage of the popular vote achieved by each of the respective political groups and the wishes of the electorate.

In light of these concerns, Councillor Mitchell felt it important to recognise the importance of robust checks and balances within the Council’s governance arrangements with particular emphasis placed on the role of scrutiny in holding executive members and council officers to account, improving transparency, and helping to secure effective outcomes for residents.  As a result, she advised that the Green Group were formally moving an amendment to the report, seeking to explore the establishment (as an additional change to the Constitution) of an additional scrutiny committee with a specific focus on housingin order to strengthen accountability, improve oversight of housing services, and enhance political representation within scrutiny arrangements.  In support of the amendment, Councillor Mitchell highlighted that the Council currently operated with fewer scrutiny committees than many other London boroughs, with the existing scrutiny arrangements not felt to provide sufficient capacity to examine all council functions effectively in terms of managing the volume and complexity of work and time available for detailed scrutiny.  The focus on housing was highlighted as a specific area of concern in this respect, given the substantial expenditure on temporary accommodation and the calls for improved oversight made by external organisations and stakeholders.

In addition, it was felt the proposed additional scrutiny committee would also provide an opportunity for a broader political representation within the Council's governance arrangements enabling greater opportunities for representation across political groups and in relation to the chairing arrangements which would better reflect the outcome of the recent local election.  Referencing comments made earlier in the meeting to collaboration and cross-party working, Councillor Mitchell hoped that all members would support the amendment given the focus on multi-party politics as an increasingly significant feature of both local and national politics and need for all political groups represented on the Council to work collaboratively, seek compromise, and build consensus in order to achieve the best outcomes for residents.

The Mayor thanked Councillor Mitchell for moving the amendment with the Chief Executive confirming that should the establishment of an additional scrutiny committee be approved this would involve a further report being provided for the July Council meeting setting out detailed proposals in terms of remit, membership and operational arrangements.

Having noted the advice, the Mayor then opened the debate inviting other members to speak, with the following contributions received.

As an in initial contribution, Councillor Georgiou felt further clarification was required on the future arrangements proposed for motions at Full Council meetings based on the consultation undertaken with Group Leaders prior to the meeting with opposition expressed to the provision of five motions per Council meeting, which he felt to be excessive and would restrict the time available to allow sufficient debate on other important issues.  Concerns were also expressed at the justification for the proposed allocation of motions between Groups, based on the Council now operating under a minority Administration, and as a result it was felt the arrangements required further reflection and consideration, including the alternative suggestions submitted by the Liberal Democrats Group prior to the meeting.

Speaking next, Councillor Lorber advised of an additional amendment he was also seeking to move at this stage of the meeting under Standing Order 42 (a) proposing a further change to the Constitution with the Council moving from an Executive style of governance and returning to a Committee system style of decision making.

In support of the amendment, members were advised of the limited timescale remaining to enable consideration of the option to return to a committee style system of governance and highlighted his experience of operating under previous committee arrangements, which he felt provided a more democratic decision-making model allowing matters to be fully debated, scrutinised, and considered before decisions were made.  As examples of decisions he felt may have benefitted from these type of arrangements, reference was to the change in recycling arrangements, introduction and operation of dockless e-bikes and management of Council owned void properties provided.  Referring to comments made during the meeting, Councillor Lorber felt the move to a committee style system would also allow political groups to be represented more effectively in decision-making and would be particularly appropriate in a council where no single party held overall control, enabling the views of all councillors to be heard and better reflecting democratic representation and on this basis he commended the additional amendment to members.

Speaking next, Councillor Kansagra whilst acknowledging that the outcome of the election had returned a Council with no overall control felt there was now a responsibility on all councillors to work collectively in establishing a way forward that would enable the Council to continue functioning effectively and avoid the potential for disruption at future meetings through the provision of a clear structure and process for governance.  In welcoming the assurance provided that a more detailed review of constitutional changes would follow he advised the Conservative Group considered this a fair and constructive approach and way forward highlighting the responsibility on all political groups to work together in the interests of residents.  Whilst recognising the importance in ensuring that council decisions remained subject to appropriate scrutiny, it was felt the approach outlined within the proposals moved by the Leader of the Council and assurance regarding an ongoing review of the Constitution would enable an appropriate and constructive way forward which he advised the Conservative Group would support.

As a final contribution to the debate, Councillor Clinton felt it important to highlight the ability for councillors from all Groups to be able to exercise independent judgement and to disagree, where they felt it appropriate with their group leadership.  On this basis it was hoped members would consider supporting the amendments outlined as a means of strengthening democratic scrutiny and accountability within the borough.  Councillor Clinton advised that he also supported the concerns previously outlined in terms of the existing capacity for effective scrutiny and ended by encouraging any members who disagreed with their group position to voice those concerns in support of improved scrutiny and accountability.

As there were no further members who had indicated they wished to speak, the Mayor having thanked members for their contribution then drew the debate to a close by firstly inviting Councillor Muhammed Butt (as mover of the original report) followed by Councillor Mitchell (as mover of the first amendment) and then Councillor Lorber (as mover of the second amendment) to exercise their rights of reply.

Speaking first, Councillor Muhammed Butt once again outlined what he felt to be the balanced and proportionate basis on which the proposals presented in the report for the provision of motions and advance notice written questions had been developed.  Whilst advising that the Labour Group would be willing to consider and support the amendment moved by Councillor Mitchell on the proposed establishment of an additional scrutiny committee focussed around housing, it was pointed out this would be on the basis of any final proposal being developed as part of the wider review of the constitution following the meeting with the opportunity taken, in concluding, to reiterate the commitment made to continue working with all political groups.

Following on Councillor Mitchell, in exercising her right of reply took the opportunity to thank members for the support expressed in terms of developing more effective cross partnership working and collaboration and hoped all members would be willing to support the amendment she had moved in seeking to enhance democratic scrutiny and accountability.

Councillor Lorber was then invited to speak, and in exercising his right of reply once again highlighted the importance of the timescale in support of the consideration of his amendment in advance of forthcoming legislative changes being introduced by the Government relating to local government governance arrangements, which were expected to come into force in June 2026.  Referring to the ability introduced under the original localism arrangements, empowering local authorities to determine their own decision-making structures (including the option to not only adopt an Executive style system of governance but also to operate under a committee system) he felt the current Government had moved away from the principle of localism in now removing the ability for Council’s to decide for themselves how decision-making should be conducted.  Given the anticipated timescale in which these changes were expected to come into effect, Councillor Lorber advised he had considered it necessary to move the amendment seeking a return to a committee style system of governance enabling its consideration in advance of the option being removed.  Members were therefore urged to consider and support the amendment, as a means of promoting the wider engagement of all members in decision-making across the Council and as a means of better serving residents and leading to improved outcomes through a more inclusive decision-making structure.

Having thanked councillors for their contributions, the Mayor then moved to the vote on the proposed changes to the Constitution, which he advised would start with the amendments moved by Councillor Mitchell and then Councillor Lorber, prior a vote on the final substantive recommendations.

Prior to the vote being taken, Councillor Georgiou (as Leader of the Liberal Democrats Group) requested (under Standing Order 43 (c)) that the vote on the amendments moved by Councillor Mitchell and Councillor Lorber be undertaken on the basis of a roll call.  Having confirmed the request, the Mayor then moved to put the amendments to the vote, in the order they were moved which was conducted by the Chief Executive.

On a recorded vote being taken the amendment moved by Councillor Mitchell relating to the proposed establishment of a third Scrutiny Committee, with responsibility for housing-related matters was declared CARRIED with it therefore RESOLVED that the Council (as a further change to the Constitution) explore the establishment of a third scrutiny committee, with a focus on housing related matters.  Members were reminded this would be on the basis of the detailed arrangements being subject to further development following the meeting and a final proposal being presented back to the next Council meeting in July 2026.

The voting recorded on the amendment moved by Councillor Mitchell on exploring the establishment of a third scrutiny committee with a focus on housing was as follows:

For (53): Councillors Aden, Ahmadi-Moghaddam, P.Ahmed, Alexandre, Amadi, Anderson, Bajwa, Blackman, Brown, Burn, M.Butt, S.Butt, Chadha, Chauhan, Choudry, Chowdhury, Clinton, Dar, De Souza, Dixon, Donnelly-Jackson, Do Rosario, Gallagher, Georgiou, Grahl, Hack, Ibrahim, Jansali, Johnson, Kansagra, Kelcher, Knight, Lorber, Madhabushi, Mahmood, Malonga, Maurice, McLeish, Mishra, Mitchell, Mulaisho, A.Patel, H.Patel, N.Patel, Perrin, Ryan, Rubin, Shah, Thomas, Unger, Vakani, Want and Warsame.

Abstentions (2): Councillors Agha (Mayor) and Mistry (Deputy Mayor).

The Mayor then moved on to put the amendment moved by Councillor Lorber in relation to adoption of a committee style system of governance and decision making to the vote.

On a recorded vote being taken the amendment was declared LOST.

The voting recorded on the amendment moved by Councillor Lorber to adopt a committee style system of governance was as follows:

For: (20): Councillors Ahmadi-Moghaddam, Alexandre, Brown, Chauhan, Clinton, Gallagher, Georgiou, Jansali, Lorber, Malonga, Mitchell, Mulaisho, N.Patel, Perrin, Ryan, Shah, Unger, Vakani, Want and Warsame.

Against (33): Councillors Aden, P.Ahmed, Amadi, Anderson, Bajwa, Blackman, Burn, M.Butt, S.Butt, Chadha, Choudry, Chowdhury, Dar, De Souza, Dixon, Donnelly-Jackson, Do Rosario, Grahl, Hack, Ibrahim, Johnson, Kansagra, Kelcher, Knight, Madhabushi, Mahmood, Maurice, McLeish, Mishra, A.Patel, H.Patel, Rubin and Thomas.

Abstentions (2): Councillors Agha (Mayor) and Mistry (Deputy Mayor).

The Mayor then moved on to put the substantive recommendations relating to the constitutional changes detailed within the report (as moved by the Leader of the Council and amended to include exploring the establishment of a third scrutiny committee with a focus on housing) to a vote which was undertaken by a show of hands and unanimously declared CARRIED.

It was therefore RESOLVED to approve:

(1)    The amendments to Standing Orders 35 and 41 in Part 2 of the Constitution as detailed in paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2 of the report.

(2)    To include, as part of the ongoing review of the Constitution, the establishment of a third scrutiny committee with a focus on housing on which a further report would be provided for the Council meeting in July 2026 setting out detailed proposals.

(3)    To authorise the Director of Law to amend the Constitution, accordingly, including making any necessary incidental or consequential changes.