Issue - meetings

Reference from Member and Democratic Services Group - Revised Petitions Scheme

Meeting: 22/11/2017 - Council (Item 9)

9 Reference from Member and Democratic Services Group - Revised Petitions Scheme pdf icon PDF 159 KB

To receive a report from the Chief Executive recommending changes to the Council Petitions Scheme.    (Report No:  103)

 

Council is asked to approve the revised scheme. 

 

The report has been recommended to Council by the Member and Democratic Services Group. 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor Simon moved and Councillor Fonyonga seconded a report from the Chief Executive recommending changes to the Council’s petitions scheme.  (Report No: 103)

 

NOTED

 

1.               The report had been recommended to Council by the Member and Democratic Services Group.

 

2.               The scheme had been revised, following careful consideration by the Member and Democratic Services Group, to ensure that the scheme could only be used by those people living, working and studying in Enfield – this would include people living on out of borough estates and those who had been placed by the local authority outside the borough. 

 

3.               Other amendments included changes to the complaints procedures and additions to the list of petitions that the Council were unable to accept. 

 

4.               Thanks to all the officers involved for their hard work in facilitating the improvements to the Council’s democratic processes. 

 

5.               The reservations of the Opposition in regard to the changes to the eligibility requirements for those signing petitions which they saw as a part of a pattern of the Labour administration restricting democratic scrutiny and a reluctance to listen to counter arguments.

 

6.               The opposition view that people living outside the borough, including those using the road system, shopping in Enfield centres, living on the borders might have legitimate views which the Council should take account of.  It should be possible to draw a distinction to include these people in the scheme. 

 

7.               The response that there were alternative methods including consultations on particular projects such as Cycle Enfield which enabled people with legitimate views to feed them into the Council.  The Council’s processes were transparent and open and it was ready to act responsibly, listen and to take account of the views of all those with an interest.  The petitions scheme was just one scheme, one designed for Enfield residents.

 

8.               In summing up Councillor Simon said that there was a balance to be made between a comprehensive consultation process and a petition scheme.  When consulting there was a need to identify where people are coming from:  there was not a rigid line.  This was different from a petition scheme for residents of the borough.  The changes had been agreed originally on a cross party basis.

 

Following the discussion the recommendations in the report were put to the vote with the following result: 

 

For:  33

Against:  0

Abstentions:  18

 

AGREED to approve the proposed changes to the Council’s petition scheme as set out in appendix A to the report.