Motions rejected

Question

Standing Orders detail that motions that are rejected should be recorded with an explanation by the proper Officer
To me this indicates that a list should be retained of all such motions
Do any Parish Councils keep lists of rejected motions and do they make them available via their website?

Answer 1

Good question and I'll be interested in seeing any other answers.  I know that our Clerk has rejected a couple but she has told me about it (Chair) and her decision was sensible. The motions were all very vague in response to emails received from various sources. Last one I can remember was about making more green spaces. A councillor emailed and said 'can we put this on the agenda'. That was all, no solid suggestion about actually doing something or even making further enquiries.
But I have no idea if the Clerk keeps a list and have never heard of it having to be published.

Answer 2

A list should be kept, but there is no requirement to publish it. Having said that, it's not confidential information, so if a member of the public asks, they should be allowed free access to it, otherwise it could result in an FOI and a lot of time wasted on something unnecessarily.

Comments

Interesting question which fortunately it  is not included in our SOs .  But I have an associated question . Our SOs refer to A motion shall relate to the responsibilities of the meeting which it is tabled for.  What is the  definition of tabled.  There must be some action which defines formal acceptance by the Clerk.  In my case the Chairman wrote to Clerk asking her to include it on the Agenda.  It subsequently disappeared.   I have been asked to re submit to the Chairman again but will he change his mind ??

---

Thank you for the prompt replies they are very helpful
We use Standard Standing Orders and it’s at item 9h
If motions are vague then help should be given to unvague them !
A lot of Councils use a template for motions which makes life a lot easier so Openspaces that’s the solution for you
If you send one in you’d expect either
1 an acceptance and confirmation it’s included on the Agenda to give you time to prepare
2 help to word the motion correctly
3 rejection with a full explanation

---

I constantly go on to people  by saying everything we do is a transaction with a customer .  My PC's response to that is "this isn't Boots the electorate does not a choice".  They simply don't get the concept of internal customers.  All transactors (is that a word?)  should seek to understand who your customers are and strive to meet  their agreed needs   In the case of motion submission there are several customers so you have system which satisfies them all. So yes Jules its quite simple. Its called common sense .  Oh that life was so easy.

Is there a recognised procedure for tabling motions?  Can they come from an individual Councillor i.e. direct to the clerk or does it have to go through the Chairman?

---

There should be a procedure in your Standing Orders that covers motions have a look through them as I can’t believe you haven’t got anything
Funnily enough I’m considered to be a troublemaker because I believe residents are customers and the huge amount of money stockpiled in the bank is the residents money held on trust

I once asked a Chair why they wouldn’t meet the allotment association and she said because they’d complain I said maybe the complaints are justified and wasn’t it in both parties interests to have allotments that were well run

---

The model standing orders specify that motions should be submitted by members of the council directly to the clerk. There is no role for the chairman in filtering motions, unless the clerk considers the wording to be improper, in which case, a written record should be made and kept of the nature of the clerk's concerns, unless the chairman decides that the motion may be included on the agenda.

---

Where does it say that Dave cant see anything in para 9?

---

9b - written notice to the Proper Officer
9e - Proper Officer to consult the Chairman if improper (the motion, not the Officer!)
9h - rejections shall be recorded

---

On ours h is on it’s own on the next page

---

Our reads If the wording or subject of a proposed motion is considered improper, the Proper Officer shall consult with the chairman of the forthcoming meeting or, as the case may be, the councillors who have convened the meeting, to consider whether the motion shall be included in the agenda or rejected.   So you are saying because the reference is to the Chairman the implication is that the motion comes from a third party i.e. not the Chairman (which can only be a member) ?

A sudden thought I suppose that if a motion is put to a Committee then the proposer must be a member of that committee? Or is it in theory possible for a member of the public to submit one (which is of course what a non member of a committee is treated as). All getting a bit complicated this

---

You're overthinking this one.

Any Member may submit a motion to the Clerk for inclusion on the agenda. The Chair has no say and need not be made aware. SO9b "No motion may be moved at a meeting unless it is on the agenda and the mover has given written notice of its wording to the Proper Officer at least four clear days before the meeting." For a committee, only members of the committee may submit a motion.

If the Clerk considers the motion to be improper, the Chair is asked whether or not they wish to debate it, but if the meeting was called by members of the Council as an extraordinary meeting, those members are asked, not the Chair. The fact that the Chair or Clerk does not wish to include an item doesn't make it improper. Examples of improper motions would be matters falling outside the remit or powers of the Council, matters of politics or religion, issues not appertaining to the area or population of the Council etc.

In order to regulate the use of the improper motion provisions, a record must be kept. SO9h "Motions rejected shall be recorded with an explanation by the Proper Officer of the reason for rejection." This would not apply to a motion considered improper by the Clerk if, on consultation, the Chair (or in the case of an extraordinary meeting, the members who had called the meeting), decided that it was acceptable to include the item on the agenda.

---

Great info this. Two final points. Prior to the co-option of recent new Cllrs the Council passed motion limiting the numbers on the various Committees (see separate thread).  This means new Cllrs cant get on any committee as they are already full.  Given that motions must relate to the business of the committee in the absence of getting access to the Committee's agenda can a motion relating to committee business be put to Full Council as it has an overarching remit ?  Also given the Proper Officer's decision on motion acceptance is final must the provide a defendable reason in line with SO provisions ?

---

Good point it really depends on how inclusive your Council is
You could ask for the motion to be heard by the full Council and then referred to the sub committee
Or if it is important ask the full Council to consider it as we’ve done in the past
Personally I feel Councils can streamline their procedures, abolish sub committees and if necessary have more full Council meetings if necessary preventing this problem
Moving to your second point there can be a huge gulf between hope and expectation
I know a case where a motion asking for a presentation ( not a vote ) has twice been refused for spurious reasons
But if push comes to shove the ability to call for an EGM gives you the power to put a motion in front of full Council

---

If a Council delegates a function to a committee, the Council should not consider any matters that it has delegated. You can't have two distinct bodies considering the same issues. It's a recipe for chaos, especially if the committee has a delegated budget. Delegation must be formally documented, so that the boundaries are clear to all.

At your Annual Meeting in May, the whole committee structure and membership will be up for review, so new members will have the opportunity to put themselves forward for committee membership. I believe it is right and proper to limit the number of members on committees, as smaller groups make quicker decisions and, if you have the right people on the committee with the most appropriate skills, qualifications and life experience, they'll make the best decisions too. I'm aware of smaller Councils that have a committee structure, but membership is not defined, so every member of the Council seems to be on every committee. That's a Council meeting, not a committee meeting.

The standing order requires rejected motions to be recorded with an explanation, so this implies a written record. If your Clerk is not keeping such a record, you should put a motion forward asking the Clerk to do so, in line with the standing order.

---

There seems to be two separate arguments here.  Smaller more skilful committees make better and quicker decisions whereas bigger ones are more inclusive and better for overall Cllr development.   Our problem is that we have the same people on both committees (50% of all Cllrs and 18 out 24 seats ) which leaves the other 50% picking up scraps (6 seats).   Of course when it comes to voting time they have the numbers to re-elect themselves.  From where I am standing the minimum figure is best.

---

Does the clerk have the right to put their own motion on the agenda ie without any Cllr input?

---

There are many items that the Clerk will put on the agenda, mainly standing items that are included in standing orders or financial regs, periodic reviews of policies and procedures etc, but a Clerk should not be seen to be dictating policy.

---

If a para 9  motion is submitted on time must it be either accepted or rejected i.e. can the clerk say I reject it as I need to think about it some more

---

If you’ve asked for it to be included on a particular agenda and the motion is submitted in time then to me it’s a rejection and should be listed,do you know if  the Clerk has discussed it with the Chair z?

---

The problem is if its a rejection is your only option then to re submit it next month i.e.  there is no pending tray ?  In my case I asked that the committee consider a certain question and the clerk's reply was that she needed to think about it first.  If that is possible it defeats the object of the procedure IMHO.
This whole question of what is the actual/role  scope of the Clerk needs sorting out .  Trouble is everyone says ask NALC to  decide