Agenda item

1.         The item was delivered by Democratic Services Officer, Ruth Emberley.

2.         The paper was taken as read and the following key points was highlighted

to Members:

a)       The Local Government and Housing Act 1989 political proportionality principles did not apply to Outside Body appointments, although the County Council’s convention in recent years had been that appointments were shared between the Political Groups on a proportional basis, insofar that it was possible.

b)       It was explained to Members that the Committee previously agreed an Outside Bodies Protocol (provided to Members in Appendix 2 of the report) that provided a framework around the activities of the Committee.  This framework was intended to be used as a reference document for individuals nominated and for nomination.

c)        The four Local Government Association groups included in Appendix 1 were politically proportional and therefore Members of these are nominated by the Political Groups.  The details of these appointments were being confirmed and an updated would be provided once the details have been made and confirmed with the relevant Groups.

d)       The Aylesham and District Community Workshop Trust had updated their Terms of Reference, which had been approved by the Trustees. The updates included the removal of the requirement for Kent County Council to appoint a Member. The change would be proposed at the forthcoming Annual General Meeting, scheduled for the 25 November 2025. Consequently, the Trust had been removed from the list.

e)       The Rochester Bridge Trust was currently reviewing their Constitution.  The Trust intended to remove one of the positions for Kent County Council. There were currently 2 posts nominated by KCC, one of which is currently vacant. The Trust intends to delete the post currently held by Ms Sarah Hohler at the end of her term on 31 May 2026 and therefore the Committee was asked to nominate a Member to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the second, vacant, post to 31 May 2027.  Thereafter an appointment to a 4-year term appointment would be requested from KCC.

f)        Efforts were underway to establish whether appointments were

 required for the Duke of York Military School. An update would be   

 provided to the Committee.

g)       Member interest had been expressed by some Members in relation

         to Gatwick Airport Consultative Committee and the Southern

         Regional Flood and Coastal Committee. These appointments were

         subject to the process set out in Section 3 of the Outside Bodies

         protocol.

h)      All nominated Members would be provided with a copy of the

         Outside Body Protocol.

3.       Mr Watts highlighted to the following key points to Members:

a)       It was important to recognise that the level of personal liability

          which occurred when someone was appointed as a Trustee also

required a level of indemnity, support and advice to be provided to any individual in that position.  Mr Watts confirmed that a wrap

around support service would be provided to any Member who took on that responsibility, to ensure that the liabilities and risks were fully understood.

b)       In many circumstances, Members were indemnified by KCC as they were appearing on behalf of the County Council, but where a Member acted in a way contrary to the interests of the County Council, this could disrupt their indemnity.

4.       In answer to Member questions, the following was said:

a)       During the previous administrative cycle, the merits of filling the positions with Councillors from a range of political parties was broadly recognised. While the positions were not allocated as an absolute, proportional, number, the appointments had been carried out by Member discussion and agreement.

b)       Historically, several factors for selecting Members were considered, such as the geography of the outside body organisation, particular interests or Member personal political preference.

c)       The Selection and Member Services Committee was responsible for making the decision to appoint Members to serve on outside body organisations.  If the Committee made the decision to not appoint Mr Watts to effectively organise this (in accordance with the recommendations) then the decision to facilitate the appointments rested with the Committee to organise.  Mr Watts confirmed that the Committee was not bound by any decision of the predecessor administrative cycle.

5.       Mr Rayner confirmed that he would like to be considered for nomination for both the Kent Association of Local Council and the Kent Downs National Landscape Joint Advisory Committee.  Mr Rayner had been involved with both organisations, in particular the Kent Association for Local Councils, and indicated that he would like to continue in his role.           

6.       Members indicted their preference to approach Councillors with a clear set of rules, guidance and criteria in respect of the outside body appointments as this would provide all Members with an equal opportunity to nominate themselves.  Mr Watts confirmed that, if it was the will of the committee, he would draft an email to disseminate to Members which reflected these terms.

7.       It was proposed by Mr Prater, and seconded by Ms Nolan, that the Monitoring Officer would contact Members to explore appetite for nominations to the various outside body organisations; if the number of Members interested did not exceed the number of positions available, the Committee would delegate the responsibility to appoint to the Monitoring Officer. If there were more Member requests than vacancies, the Monitoring Officer would return to the Committee and set out the situation in a report and the Committee would then consider how to manage multiple applications for a single organisation.

The Committee voted unanimously in favour of the proposal.

8.       RESOLVED that the Monitoring Officer will:

o   Notify Members in writing of the criteria and responsibilities of Outside Body appointments;

o   Prepare an updated report for the next meeting of the Committee with information of which appointments remain to be made.  In the event more requests than vacancies had been made, the Monitoring Officer would assist the Committee to consider how to multiple applications for a single organisation

o   Formally confirm appointments, once the nominee has confirmed their acceptance.