Last year, councillors at ‘Your Waverley’ responded to a Government consultation.
Not everyone among its 50-councillor contingent endorsed the idea of participating in meetings remotely. Some long-serving councillors believed it would be a retrograde step.
Waverley. However, some newer and younger Waverley councillors welcomed the move to make their councillor duties easier to manage alongside their work and family commitments.
With LGR – Local Government Reorganisation – happening soon, virtual attendance may become more popular due to the distances councillors may be forced to travel to unitary authorities across Surrey.
COVID prompted a move towards “virtual attendance”
The government has committed to legislating for remote attendance at council meetings when “time allows” and announced that it will also require upper-tier councils to have proxy voting schemes for full council meetings.
The Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government has published its response to a consultation it carried out last year on remote meetings and proxy voting for councils.
There was overwhelming support.
This confirmed that ministers could proceed with necessary changes to allow remote attendance at meetings, something many in the sector have campaigned for.
The consultation received 5,844 responses, and 86% were in favour of remote attendance for council meetings.
Over half (56%) said there should be “no limitations” on remote attendance. In comparison, a third suggested limits so that two-thirds of attendees should be in-person and a further 33% said remote attendance should be reserved for “exceptional circumstances.
In its conclusion, the government said:
“On remote attendance, we plan to permit local authorities to develop their own locally appropriate policies, if they decide to hold remote meetings.”
Local Government Association chair Louise Gittins (Lab) said this was a “positive step”.
“We’re pleased that the government recognises that councils should be trusted to set out the arrangements and decide for themselves how best to use this flexibility.”
Proxy voting
Separately, the consultation also sought views on proxy voting in cases where a member is unable to attend a full council meeting. This attracted less support from respondents.
Some 47% said that proxy voting would not be helpful or would be a disadvantage, and 36% said it would be beneficial. 17% said it would be neither useful nor a disadvantage.
In its consultation response, the LGA raised concerns about proxy voting, particularly as ungrouped independent members are unable to use it, which may be perceived as creating an unfair advantage for larger political parties.
However, the government said it intends to “require principal (unitary, upper and second-tier) councils to implement proxy voting schemes, to provide consistency for members who are absent when they become a new parent, or for serious or long-term illness”.
The government added that the requirement was intended for full council meetings and that for other meetings, councils could choose to use proxy voting schemes or substitute/pairing schemes.
In its submission to the consultation, the LGA said that traditional proxy voting, where someone gives their instruction about how to vote to another before the meeting, is “not compatible” with the requirement for councillors to “hear all the evidence” before reaching their decision.
The LGA added that if the proxy instead delegates their voting power to another member, it would be “more compatible”, but questioned if this would actually “have the intended impact of allowing the principal member to exercise their democratic duty indirectly”.
Cllr Gittins said the LGA would review the proposals and “work with government to clarify any outstanding questions on how this will be practically implemented.”