How should actions agreed at meetings be monitored?

Question

Minutes of meetings often include actions on councillors and officers.  However there is no mechanism for following up on these actions - consequently decisions and actions agreed by Council are not followed through.  It is not allowed to have a "matters arising" item on the agenda because this is not sufficiently specific - and I agree with this.

One approach that works (and is recommended by our local council association) is to have a separate action list for actions arising.  A review of this action list is then put onto each agenda.  However the Clerk is reluctant to update this list of actions or to include such an action list on the meeting agenda.

Can Council insist on the production of such an action list and its inclusion in each agenda?

Answer 1

How a Council organises its business is a decision for the Council (as long as it keeps within the law etc), not the Clerk.  The Clerk’s job description may cover your particular point.  Even so the Clerk is an employee of the Council, and so it seems to me both reasonable and permissible for the Council to ask the Clerk to prepare an action list for consideration, and if necessary to instruct the Clerk to do so.

Comments

Thank you for your reply.  I agree but it seems difficult to force the Clerk to do anything - and everything seems stacked against Councillors exerting any control in these kind of situations.  Is this unusual or do other councils face the same issues?

Answer 2

I'm not sure that I'd agree with the prohibition of an agenda item for matters arising. Since the minutes of the meeting for which matters might arise is a public document and should be available to councillors and public as a supporting document, everyone should have a clear idea of what is likely to be discussed. Provided the chair keeps it as an item that reviews progress or triggers future considerations, and avoids making completely fresh decisions, I cannot see an objection.

Comments

"Matters arising" is not allowed by our Standing Orders.  I think the rationale (before my time) was that such an item on an agenda was too open-ended and could allow drifting into a multitude of pet topics.

The minutes are not as clear as I would like and the actions and who is responsible is often not highlighted, nor is a date specified.  Any business organisation would have failed long ago but in local government getting a sensible approach of using meetings to make progress is like pulling teeth.

---

OK, although there is nothing to stop the council from changing its standing orders. But if that is an obstacle, then Old Tom's answer is the way to go. Some clerks do tend to be obstinate, but as Old Tom says, the clerk is employed by the council. Although it would be right for a clerk to resist a council acting unlawfully or recklessly, there is no justification for being obstructive. As with any employment, there should be periodic reviews, and any problems should be raised and documented.