Borough considers plans to let public put forward debates in full council

Under the plans, motions attracting 500 or more signatures on the borough’s website would be heard at meetings of the full council.

The proposals would also:

• Change the way councillors can ask questions of the Leader of the council during formal council question times. Each political party on the council would be allowed to ask the Leader one question. No prior notification of the question would be required, as is currently the case, and the question could be asked verbally rather than in writing. “This would enable councillors to raise issues of the day as well as offer a more genuine challenge to the administration of the council.”
• See the introduction of live web-casting of council meetings; and
• Reinstate the annual State of the Borough debate.

The council added that, for legal reasons, the proposals would not relate planning or licensing matters.

The proposals will come before a meeting of the council next month. 

Cllr Kevin Davis, Leader of Kingston Council, said: “The changes we are proposing are a key part of re-building trust between local people and their elected representatives.  We recognise that the council does not have all the answers. The challenges that local government faces means that we have to work closer than ever with local people if we are to do the best for our area.  

“To do this, we need to ensure that committee meetings are not just going through the motions and serving our own decision making purposes. They need to be places where residents can bring their concerns and ideas, be listened to and then see action taken. Sometimes we will not always be able to do what residents want but at least we will have listened and considered carefully what local people want.”

Kingston last week announced plans to give voters the chance to remove their councillor if they fail to meet a set of defined standards.

Under the Royal Borough’s proposals, a number of scenarios could trigger a petition calling for a by-election. These include:

• if a councillor’s attendance at meetings over a municipal year falls below 20%;
• if a councillor attends fewer than two full council or neighbourhood committee meetings within a year;
• if a councillor is convicted of a crime for which a prison sentence has been imposed and the appeal period has expired without the sentence having been overturned;
• if a councillor moves their main residence outside of the borough.

Where one or more of these criteria are met, Kingston’s monitoring officer would consider the circumstances and whether a petition should be launched on the council web site calling for the resignation of the councillor concerned. Such a petition would remain live for three months.

If more than 33% of the registered electors in the ward in question sign the petition, there would be an expectation that the councillor concerned would resign thereby triggering a by-election.

The arrangement would be a non-statutory protocol that members would be required to sign at the earliest opportunity on taking office.