Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED That the updates provided be noted.
RESOLVED That it be recommended to Council that the revisions to the Multi-Location Meeting Policy be adopted, subject to the following amendments: (a) Remote attendees must vote from a private, indoor location and must not vote whilst in a vehicle or public transport, or whilst otherwise in transit (to be added to Section 3 – Remote Attendees); (b) To be considered present, Members must be able to speak and be heard and see and be seen by others. Should a Member experience connectivity issues which means that they need to turn their camera off, this should be communicated to Democratic Services and a public explanation provided (to be added to Section 4 – Technical Issues).
RESOLVED That the reports on Safeguarding and Violence Against Women, Domestic Violence and Sexual Violence (VAWDASV) E-Learning Compliance and E-Learning on Pembrokeshire Online Development (POD) be noted.
RESOLVED a) That the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru’s Annual Report for 2026-27 be noted. b) That it be recommended to Council that the cap on Co-opted Member payments be removed.
RESOLVED That the report be noted.
RESOLVED a) That the Action Plan of activity ahead of the 2027 local elections be approved. b) That the Diversity in Democracy Pledge be recommended to Council for adoption.
RESOLVED That the Fair Campaign Pledge be noted and that all Members be recommended to sign up to the Pledge.
RESOLVED That the Democratic Services Committee Forward Work Programme be approved, including the following addition: a) That a report be brought to the Committee’s next meeting on Member safety in County Hall.
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Jamie Adams.
There were no Members wishing to speak on an Agenda Item.
None were declared.
Councillor Jonathan Grimes Moved the Minutes; Seconded by Councillor Pat Davies. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the Minutes of the Meeting held on 6 November 2025 be approved as a correct record.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the updates provided be noted.
The Head of Democratic Services presented the report and stated that it updated the Committee on Actions from the last meeting on 6 November 2025, to confirm progress and provide assurances that the agreed actions were being followed up. She highlighted that the actions outlined in Appendix A had all been completed. Councillor Michael John queried whether the Democratic Services team were content with the resolution of their new working area arrangements, to which the Head of Democratic Services confirmed the team were very pleased and that the location meant that Members had been able to find them easily since the re-location. Moved by Councillor Michael John; Seconded by Councillor Jonathan Grimes. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the updates provided be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That it be recommended to Council that the revisions to the Multi-Location Meeting Policy be adopted, subject to the following amendments: (a) Remote attendees must vote from a private, indoor location and must not vote whilst in a vehicle or public transport, or whilst otherwise in transit (to be added to Section 3 – Remote Attendees); (b) To be considered present, Members must be able to speak and be heard and see and be seen by others. Should a Member experience connectivity issues which means that they need to turn their camera off, this should be communicated to Democratic Services and a public explanation provided (to be added to Section 4 – Technical Issues).
The Head of Democratic Services presented the report and outlined the proposed revisions to the Multi?Location Meetings Policy following a comprehensive review undertaken with the Monitoring Officer. The updated policy streamlines content, removes duplication and outdated requirements, improves consistency, and places clearer responsibility on Members regarding attendance, participation and declarations of interest. Members were invited to consider the revisions for recommendation to Council. In considering the report, the following key points were made: · Councillor Pat Davies queried whether elements of the revised policy should be referred to the Constitutional Review Committee before progressing to the Policy and Pre-decision Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Council, noting previous work undertaken on hybrid meetings. The Head of Law and Governance advised that this was unnecessary, confirming that although the policy would sit within the Constitution, it operated as a protocol rather than a constitutional provision. She stated that consideration by the Democratic Services Committee and subsequently by the Policy and Pre-decision Overview and Scrutiny Committee was appropriate and in line with guidance, and that referral to the Constitutional Review Committee was not intended. · Councillor Michael John expressed concern that the removal of detailed conduct requirements could create ambiguity, particularly when meetings move into private session, where inappropriate surroundings or lack of privacy could compromise confidentiality. He also referred to instances where Members appeared to be participating from workplaces, questioning whether the reduced prescription might allow situations that challenge the integrity of participation. · In response, the Head of Law and Governance acknowledged the point and suggested that an explicit sentence could be added to the section on private sessions to emphasise Members’ responsibility to ensure privacy before continuing. She noted that no significant problems had arisen in practice, and that expectations regarding remaining online throughout debates remained in the policy. While Democratic Services would still alert Members in cases of obvious issues, the revised policy intentionally placed primary responsibility on Members to conduct themselves appropriately. Councillor John agreed that adding reference to privacy in private session would be helpful and reiterated that Members should remain accountable for their own conduct. He confirmed he was content with the proposed changes. · Councillor Elwyn Morse raised concerns that, while he supported the revised policy, the reduced prescriptiveness could allow Members to participate in meetings without fully engaging in the debate, particularly if joining from work or other unsuitable locations with cameras off. He asked whether any national guidance or legislation existed to address potential risks, especially during contentious votes. The Head of Law and Governance explained that Welsh Government guidance set out the legal framework for multi?location meetings but left significant discretion to individual authorities. All Welsh councils had their own policies, some more detailed than others, but she considered a less prescriptive approach appropriate with responsibility placed on Members to ensure they had heard the debate, understood the papers and could properly participate. She noted that overly prescriptive requirements risked placing officers in an inappropriate policing role, potentially exposing them to accusations of bias. · Councillor Morse queried whether any legal remedies existed where decisions were taken by Members who had not genuinely participated. The Head of Law and Governance confirmed that while no specific legislation governed such situations, a decision could be subject to judicial review if it was demonstrably made improperly. She added that Democratic Services and the Monitoring Officer would act if alerted to concerns, contacting the Member to ensure they had sufficiently engaged with the debate and were satisfied they could make a defensible decision. · Councillor Michelle Bateman noted that Members joining remotely from a workplace should not automatically be assumed to be working during the meeting, explaining that many Members use flexible or unpaid break arrangements to attend. She added that some may join from work after finishing their shift to avoid unnecessary travel delays, while others may flex their hours and catch up later. She stressed that being in a workplace does not, in itself, indicate reduced engagement and that similar distractions could occur in a home setting. · Councillor Bateman further suggested that reminders about ensuring privacy when meetings enter private session should also be included in the email links sent to all Members, as those joining part?way through a meeting would otherwise miss the verbal reminder given at the start. This would help prevent confidential discussions being overheard in public spaces across all meeting types, including scrutiny meetings. · Councillor Michael John referred to the wording within the policy which had been changed from “Members must keep their cameras on” to “Members should keep their cameras on.” He queried whether this weakened the requirement, stating his understanding that cameras were expected to always remain on to maintain confidence and transparency. He suggested clarifying the wording to reflect this and proposed adding that any connectivity or technical issues preventing camera use should be agreed with the Chair or Democratic Services at the start of the meeting. He further noted that strengthening the section on private sessions could be achieved by expanding paragraph 3.7, in line with earlier discussion regarding privacy requirements. · Councillor Jonathan Grimes queried whether the policy should also address Members joining meetings from public places, noting previous instances of participation from locations such as coffee shops or while travelling. He queried whether such settings were appropriate, particularly given issues experienced elsewhere with remote attendance and voting while in transit. The Head of Law and Governance stated that, for public meetings, her view was that participation from a public place was acceptable provided the Member could hear, concentrate and contribute effectively and that anything said would be audible on the webcast in any event but welcomed other views. · Councillor Michael John observed that while joining a public meeting from a public place might be workable, it would not be good practice if the meeting was to move unexpectedly into private session, as Members in such settings would be unable to ensure confidentiality or transition quickly to a secure environment. He noted that this reinforced earlier points about the need for preparedness. The Head of Law and Governance agreed and acknowledged the practical difficulty highlighted and confirmed that the relevant section of the policy would be strengthened to emphasise the need for Members to anticipate the possibility of a meeting moving into private session. · The Chair noted that when Members experience low connectivity, they typically notify the meeting at the outset or indicate this when issues arise mid?meeting, and that such situations are usually evident to others on screen. She commented that managing this relies to some extent on trust between Members. The Head of Law and Governance agreed, emphasising that public perception is important. She suggested that where a Member cannot keep their camera on due to connectivity problems, this should be stated clearly at the meeting so that viewers understand the reason, rather than assuming the Member is absent. She suggested that this would improve transparency for both Members and the public. This was accepted. · Councillor Jonathan Grimes made reference to guidance issued by the Senedd on this matter in the following terms: ‘Remote attendees must vote from a private, indoor location and must not vote whilst in a vehicle or public transport, or whilst otherwise in transit’. · Councillor Elwyn Morse suggested that the policy should explicitly require Members to join meetings from a private and appropriate location. He expressed concern about participation from moving or public environments, such as trains or other public transport, where signal interruption and surrounding activity could impair both concentration and meeting integrity. He suggested that Members should ensure they are in a static location with reliable connectivity before joining and that wording could be strengthened, potentially drawing on definitions used in Senedd guidance mentioned earlier. · Councillor Michelle Bateman stated that she would not support a requirement for Members to participate only from defined private or static locations. She argued that Members are best placed to judge whether they can fully engage in a meeting, noting that suitable circumstances vary widely. A Member on a quiet train carriage, for example, might be more focused than someone participating from home during school holidays. She emphasised that it would be impractical to create a policy covering every possible scenario, and that discretion should remain with individual Members, except in cases such as driving or entering private session, where confidentiality requirements clearly apply. She concluded that concerns about a Member’s participation should be raised through the appropriate channels rather than imposed through prescriptive rules. · Councillors Pat Davies and Michael John queried whether the revised policy would be considered by the Policy and Pre-decision Overview and Scrutiny Committee and subsequently by full Council, as they felt that the discussion to date had established a solid basis, with key issues identified, and anticipated that further points would naturally arise as part of the wider deliberations. The Head of Law and Governance agreed that wider Member involvement in the forthcoming discussions would be appropriate, noting that it would not be fair for only one group to consider the revisions in detail. She expressed her support for broader engagement. Councillor Jonathan Grimes Moved that ‘Remote attendees must vote from a private, indoor location and must not vote whilst in a vehicle or public transport, or whilst otherwise in transit’; Seconded by Councillor Elwyn Morse. The vote, undertaken by way of a roll call, was carried and the votes were as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Jonathan Grimes, Michael John, Elwyn Morse and Sam Skyrme-Blackhall [4] Against the Motion: Councillors Michelle Bateman and Pat Davies [2] There were no abstentions. RESOLVED That it be recommended to Council that the revisions to the Multi-Location Meeting Policy be adopted, subject to the following amendments: (a) Remote attendees must vote from a private, indoor location and must not vote whilst in a vehicle or public transport, or whilst otherwise in transit (to be added to Section 3 – Remote Attendees); (b) To be considered present, Members must be able to speak and be heard and see and be seen by others. Should a Member experience connectivity issues which means that they need to turn their camera off, this should be communicated to Democratic Services and a public explanation provided (to be added to Section 4 – Technical Issues).
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the reports on Safeguarding and Violence Against Women, Domestic Violence and Sexual Violence (VAWDASV) E-Learning Compliance and E-Learning on Pembrokeshire Online Development (POD) be noted.
The Head of HR presented the joint reports on behalf of herself and the Learning and Development Manager and stated that they outlined two matters for Members’ attention: completion rates for Safeguarding E?learning and training on Violence Against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (VAWDASV). She expressed concern at the low level of compliance and sought the Committee’s support in encouraging Members to complete the required modules. She explained that a second accompanying report set out all mandatory training for elected Members, detailing the legislative basis for each requirement, including obligations under health and safety, safeguarding and equalities legislation. She emphasised that only nine courses were mandatory and that each had a clear statutory or regulatory rationale. She invited Members’ questions and asked for their assistance in improving compliance levels. In considering the reports, the following key points were made: · Councillor Michael John [amended on 02.07.26] queried the effectiveness of describing training as “mandatory” when Members could continue in their roles without completing it. He suggested that the terminology might be reconsidered and asked whether all listed modules, such as fire safety, needed to be mandatory. He also noted difficulty tracking which courses he had completed, suggesting that a personalised summary of completed and outstanding training would assist Members. · The Chair advised that Members already receive automated reminders when training becomes due or overdue. · The Learning and Development Manager explained that reminders escalate to the Head of Democratic Services and then to the Chief Executive if training remains incomplete. She emphasised that modules such as safeguarding are essential, as Members may encounter safeguarding issues in the community or on school premises, making up?to?date knowledge vital. She confirmed that most mandatory courses must be renewed every three years, with data?protection training required annually. · The Head of HR explained that fire?safety training was designated as mandatory due to the governance responsibilities placed on the Authority. Although many Members may have received similar training elsewhere, the Council must ensure that all Elected Members hold a minimum, consistent level of awareness when overseeing fire?safety regulations. She confirmed that all nine mandatory courses are underpinned by relevant legislation, which is why these specific modules have been selected. She added that, while the term “mandatory” is used internally, the wording could be adjusted to “essential” if Members felt this would be clearer. · Councillor Jonathan Grimes supported the view that some training may warrant a higher level of emphasis than the general “mandatory” category, noting that safeguarding in particular is comparable to the essential training required of school governors. He suggested that a smaller subset of courses could be designated as especially critical, given Members’ responsibilities when visiting schools, homes or engaging with vulnerable individuals. The Head of HR agreed to review the terminology, noting that the current list had already been reduced to nine courses to respect Members’ time. She cautioned, however, that all nine were already deemed essential due to their legislative basis, though she was willing to consider whether any could be further distinguished. · The Head of Democratic Services noted that the Induction Working Group would be reviewing induction training at its next meeting, and confirmed that this would provide an opportunity to discuss whether courses should be designated as “mandatory” or “essential,” and which specific modules should fall under each category. Moved by Councillor Elwyn Morse; Seconded by Councillor Jonathan Grimes. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the reports on Safeguarding and Violence Against Women, Domestic Violence and Sexual Violence (VAWDASV) E-Learning Compliance and E-Learning on Pembrokeshire Online Development (POD) be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED a) That the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru’s Annual Report for 2026-27 be noted. b) That it be recommended to Council that the cap on Co-opted Member payments be removed.
The Head of Democratic Services presented the report and stated that the Commission’s final 2026–27 report had been issued, with all determinations unchanged and coming into effect on 1 April. Major remuneration framework changes would only be made once per electoral cycle, with upcoming reviews to cover resettlement payments, senior salaries and Co?opted Member remuneration. She advised that the Committee had requested an annual review of the cap on Co?opted Member payments. The three?year summary showed reduced overall payments this year due to the use of hourly rates. The Chair of Governance and Audit Committee exceeded the 15?day cap due to additional statutory duties, while all others remained within limits. She noted that the cap was a historic local decision and not applied universally across authorities. The Committee was therefore asked to note the annual report and determine whether to retain, amend or remove the cap on Co?opted Member payments. In considering the report, the following key points were made: · Councillor Michael John queried the rationale behind the historic cap on co?opted member days and why it had been set at its current level, noting that additional formal meetings should reasonably attract payment. · The Head of Democratic Services explained that the cap had originally been 10 days for all Co?opted Members. It was raised to 15 days in 2023 when the Chairs of Standards and Governance and Audit Committees, now required to be a lay person under the 2021 Act, had taken on significantly increased duties, including attendance at the Corporate Joint Committee and frequent engagement with Audit Wales. She noted that although the 15?day limit had been sufficient until this year, it had now been exceeded due to workload. She added that the introduction of the hourly rate made it harder to translate hours into “full days,” and that Members were now reimbursed strictly for hours worked rather than rounded?up day rates. The Committee would therefore need to consider whether retaining a cap remained appropriate, with any recommendation to be forwarded to Council. · Councillor Michael John stated that if Co?opted Members were being asked to undertake increased workloads, including attendance at additional Corporate Joint Committee meetings, it was reasonable that they be fully remunerated for that time. He felt a cap was no longer appropriate given the expanded duties compared with a decade ago. He therefore suggested that the cap be removed, while noting the importance of ensuring this did not lead to an excessive increase in claims. · Councillor Michael John raised a further query regarding the proposed introduction of resettlement payments, noting the controversy surrounding the issue. He asked whether, should such payments be introduced, the cost would fall entirely on Pembrokeshire County Council’s budget rather than being supported by additional funding from Welsh Government, and therefore ultimately be met by local Council Taxpayers. · The Head of Democratic Services confirmed that this was likely to be the case unless Welsh Government provided dedicated funding, which she considered unlikely. She noted that the matter would be subject to consultation and encouraged Members to raise this concern formally if invited to comment. · Councillor Pat Davies stated that she supported removing the cap, noting that Co?opted Members are now paid an hourly rate and therefore remunerated only for the hours they genuinely work, provided monitoring remains in place. She asked whether the cap applied equally to Co?opted Members serving on Committees such as Schools and Learning Overview and Scrutiny Committee. · The Head of Democratic Services confirmed that the cap applied to all Co?opted Members; set at 10 full days for ordinary Co?opted Members and 15 days for Chairs. Councillor Davies reiterated her support for removing the cap on the basis that hourly?rate claims reflect actual work undertaken. Moved by Councillor Michael John; Seconded by Councillor Pat Davies. The vote, undertaken by way of a roll call, was carried and the votes were as follows: For the Motion: Councillors Michelle Bateman, Pat Davies, Jonathan Grimes, Michael John, Elwyn Morse and Sam Skyrme-Blackhall [6] There were no votes against or abstentions. RESOLVED a) That the Democracy and Boundary Commission Cymru’s Annual Report for 2026-27 be noted. b) That it be recommended to Council that the cap on Co-opted Member payments be removed.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the report be noted.
The Head of Democratic Services presented the report and stated that the Committee had previously established a Working Group to begin planning for the 2027 Member Induction Programme. The Group had now met three times and was progressing well against the action plan approved at the last meeting. She reported that the Group had reviewed and adapted the Member Support Self?Evaluation Framework for use in 2027, refreshed the Diversity and Democracy Action Plan, and considered updates to the Diversity and Democracy Pledge, the Fair Campaign Pledge, the Democracy webpages and the prospective candidates’ information packs. She noted that several of these items would be addressed in subsequent agenda reports. Moved by Councillor Elwyn Morse; Seconded by Councillor Michael John. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the report be noted.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED a) That the Action Plan of activity ahead of the 2027 local elections be approved. b) That the Diversity in Democracy Pledge be recommended to Council for adoption.
The Head of Democratic Services presented the report and stated that the Committee was asked to consider the Diverse Council Declaration and accompanying action plan and determine whether to endorse the proposed approach to supporting greater diversity within the Council. She noted that the Induction Working Group, in reviewing the proposal, supported encouraging political groups to appoint diversity ambassadors, while recognising such appointments could not be mandated, and recommended consideration, where practicable, of appointing councillors from under?represented groups to high?profile roles, while maintaining merit?based appointments. The Group also reaffirmed the importance of issuing a clear public statement promoting diversity in democracy. In considering the report, the following key points were made: · Councillor Elwyn Morse asked whether the Authority had received complaints or criticism, either formally or on social media, suggesting it was not adequately representing or promoting under?represented groups. The Head of Democratic Services replied that she was not aware of significant levels of complaint. However, she noted that some Members, particularly women, had experienced negative publicity that may have discouraged participation, though she did not have specific figures. · Councillor Jonathan Grimes commented that, while not criticising the work undertaken, the proposals could be seen as a necessary “tick?box exercise” to ensure the Authority is protected and compliant, even if no significant complaints had yet been received. He expressed support for incorporating the measures if they strengthened the Council’s position. · The Chair agreed, noting from personal experience that more support was needed, particularly for women considering standing for election. She emphasised the importance of encouraging greater female participation while ensuring prospective candidates fully understood the realities of the role. · Councillor Michelle Bateman, speaking as a member of the Working Group, noted that significant discussion had taken place about striking the right balance between merit?based appointments and the need to recognise and remove barriers faced by under?represented groups. She emphasised that the focus should be on preparatory work, encouragement, awareness and barrier?removal, rather than setting arbitrary targets. She stressed the importance of ensuring prospective candidates fully understand the realities of the councillor role, noting the demanding nature of recent Full Council meetings and the public scrutiny that accompanies difficult decisions. She highlighted that community leadership extends well beyond local casework and includes engaging with broader public issues, often under intense public and social?media scrutiny. She concluded that while the aim is not to deter candidates, it is important to manage expectations, so individuals enter the role with a clear understanding of its responsibilities and pressures. · Councillor Pat Davies reflected on the difficulties of encouraging women and individuals from minority communities to stand for elected roles, noting her own efforts to promote participation in town and community councils, governing bodies and the County Council. She highlighted a recent local by?election in Fishguard where six of the seven candidates were men, questioning why more women were not coming forward and whether prospective candidates fully understood the responsibilities involved. Councillor Davies concluded that greater communication about the breadth and seriousness of the role was essential to encourage more women and people from under?represented groups to stand, noting recent examples of female candidates withdrawing and the importance of supporting and informing those considering standing for election. · The Chair agreed with Councillor Davies, emphasising that many prospective candidates misunderstand the nature of the county councillor role. She noted that individuals are often encouraged on social media to stand because they are active in their communities, but may have little awareness of the wider, complex responsibilities at County Hall. Reflecting on her own experience joining in 2022, she described the induction period as overwhelming and stressed the importance of ensuring that candidates clearly understand the breadth of the role. Moved by Councillor Michael John; Seconded by Councillor Elwyn Morse. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED a) That the Action Plan of activity ahead of the 2027 local elections be approved. b) That the Diversity in Democracy Pledge be recommended to Council for adoption.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the Fair Campaign Pledge be noted and that all Members be recommended to sign up to the Pledge.
The Head of Democratic Services presented the report and stated that the Fair and Respectful Campaign Pledge had been reviewed by the Induction Working Group in preparation for the 2027 elections. The Committee was asked to consider the updated pledge and encourage all Members to sign it. She explained that the Working Group supported the pledge in principle but noted concerns that opposing candidates may not adhere to the same standards. It was therefore proposed that prospective candidates also be invited to sign the pledge voluntarily, with the option to include it in candidate information packs. Members had also emphasised the importance of reinforcing expected standards of conduct after election, particularly the principle of “disagreeing agreeably,” which had now been incorporated into the revised pledge. In considering the report, the following key points were made: · Councillor Jonathan Grimes expressed his full support for the pledge, noting that while its effectiveness would depend on whether candidates chose to adhere to it, he was content for it to be in place. He added that having candidates sign the pledge at least provided a clear expectation of appropriate conduct. Moved by Councillor Jonathan Grimes; Seconded by the Chair. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the Fair Campaign Pledge be noted and that all Members be recommended to sign up to the Pledge.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That the Democratic Services Committee Forward Work Programme be approved, including the following addition: a) That a report be brought to the Committee’s next meeting on Member safety in County Hall.
The Head of Democratic Services presented the report and stated that the Forward Work Programme outlined the proposed items for future meetings. She advised that the Committee was asked to note the programme and invited Members to suggest any additional topics falling within the Committee’s remit. In considering the report, the following key points were made: · Councillor Michelle Bateman raised whether Member safety in County Hall should be reviewed, noting that although recent protests and public attendance at Full Council had been well?managed, future circumstances could pose risks. She highlighted that Members sit directly beneath the public gallery and suggested examining wider building access arrangements, including entry to committee rooms and public areas. · The Head of Democratic Services confirmed that Member safety fell within the Committee’s remit. She proposed requesting a report from Facilities for the Committee’s next meeting in July, outlining current protocols, such as bag searches, and identifying whether any measures required strengthening. She noted that other authorities operated sign?in and sign?out systems, which Pembrokeshire had never adopted, and agreed to bring a paper for discussion if that was the Committee’s wish. · The Chair added that several Members had raised concerns about unrestricted access into County Hall during recent high?profile meetings. She noted that although the Police were present, the building remained very open, making it easy for individuals with grievances to enter while Members were in the Council Chamber. She also observed that people moving around the building often wore no visible identification, making it difficult to confirm who they were. She suggested that these access and security issues should also be reviewed. · Councillor Michael John supported the suggestion to review security arrangements, noting that during the recent meeting he had entered through the riverside door where no security presence was in place, meaning anyone could have walked in unchecked. He agreed that this reinforced the need for a report on building access and Member safety. · Councillor John further queried an error in the Forward Work Programme, which listed the next meeting as 27 March rather than the correct date. The Head of Democratic Services confirmed this was a typographical error carried over from the original meeting schedule. · Councillor Jonathan Grimes raised concerns about building access and security, noting that Members’ ID cards provide limited functionality and are not required to enter County Hall, allowing unrestricted movement beyond the public foyer into areas such as the Members’ Room and Chamber. He questioned why ID cards were not used for controlled entry or swipe?in/out systems, which would also support fire?safety procedures by indicating who was in the building. · Councillor Grimes also highlighted inconsistencies in bag?search arrangements, observing that he was allowed to enter without a check by showing his lanyard, while another Member without a lanyard underwent a full bag search. He suggested that a consistent, all?or?nothing approach was needed if security was to be taken seriously, including consideration of universal bag checks. He supported the proposal for a Facilities report to clarify existing arrangements and identify improvements. · Councillor Pat Davies reiterated concerns about building security, stating that members of the public often wandered freely through areas such as the toilets and upper corridors, which could leave Members feeling vulnerable. She also noted that during the previous week’s Full Council meeting the Council Chamber door had been left open, meaning anyone could have entered unchallenged. She supported receiving a Facilities report to review and strengthen access and safety arrangements. · Councillor Daves referred to the Panel Performance Assessment (PPA) response, noting that it included a point about reviewing the number of Scrutiny Committees. She recalled that this Committee had previously discussed that issue and asked when it would next be brought forward. The Head of Democratic Services confirmed that the survey on scrutiny arrangements remained open and that once responses had been analysed, any suggested changes, including to the number of committees or their terms of reference, would be presented to the Democratic Services Committee before being referred to Council. · Councillor Elwyn Morse expressed support for the proposal to commission a Facilities review, noting that it would give officers an opportunity to outline any concerns they held regarding current security arrangements. He stated that he shared concerns about the level of open access within County Hall, highlighting that Members and the public currently move through the same shared areas with little restriction. He anticipated that a Facilities report would likely reflect similar anxieties and help identify improvements to strengthen safety and access control. · Councillor John queried the extent of public access within County Hall, noting his understanding that while the lobby and committee rooms are open to the public, areas such as the Members’ Room and upper floors should not be. He asked for clarification on whether access to stairwells and office areas remained restricted and required an ID card. The Head of Democratic Services confirmed that access controls are in place and that ID cards are required to enter the office floors, including the second floor and other non?public areas. Moved by Councillor Michelle Bateman; Seconded by Councillor Jonathan Grimes. The vote, undertaken by way of a show of hands, was carried. RESOLVED That the Democratic Services Committee Forward Work Programme be approved, including the following addition: a) That a report be brought to the Committee’s next meeting on Member safety in County Hall.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.