MPA committee structure

Report: 9
Date: 27 May 2004
By: Clerk

Summary

This report seeks members’ views on the current MPA committee structure and any changes members may wish to make to it. Any changes to the current structure would need to have been approved before the annual meeting of the Authority on 8 July 2004 in order to seek nominations for chairs and membership for 2004/05.

A. Recommendation

1. members consider if any changes are required to the current committee structure; and
2. Any changes to the structure be approved and that nominations for chairs and membership to committees etc of any amended structure be sought for consideration at the Authority’s annual meeting in July 2004.

B. Supporting information

1. The current committee structure was approved in May 2002. Since then the structure has been amended to include four further sub-committees (Health and Safety, ACPO Conduct, Remuneration and Pension Forfeiture). A copy of the current committee structure is given at Appendix 1

2. During the informal session of the Co-ordination and Policing Committee (CoP) held on 19 April 2004, members were invited to consider whether the current committee structure remains fit for purpose. The reconstitution of committees at the annual meeting in July gives the opportunity to consider whether the current structure reflects the best use of members’ time given the other demands on them such as the link member role and developing the scrutiny programme. Arising from that discussion members made the following points:

1. that the full Authority meeting needs to have a more robust agenda;
2. that the current meeting cycle should remain i.e. in most cases, bi-monthly;
3. there needs to be better management of agendas to avoid duplication;
4. possible development of the scrutiny role;
5. possible amalgamation of current committees – although this would need proper consideration as to which committees could or should amalgamate; and
6. in considering amendments to the committee structure, further consideration should be given to members’ roles in relation to ‘link member functions’ and any lead member responsibilities’.

3. Members are now asked if they wish to amend the current committee structure. Following the informal discussion held at the CoP meeting on 19 April and arising from comments received from individual members may wish to consider the following:

• Metropolitan Police Authority (full Authority)
  The full Authority currently meets on the last Thursday of each month and it proposed that this should continue.
  Some members/officers have commented that some business that goes to committee (primarily Co-ordination and Policing Committee) should perhaps be going to the full Authority.
  There is general agreement that the agenda for the full Authority needs to be better planned to ensure that all members can engage with the major strategic policy issues and the Authority’s profile is promoted.
• Co ordination and Policing Committee (CoP)
  This committee currently meets twice a month. Members may now feel that a monthly meeting would be sufficient.
  A number of meetings have been cancelled or have been inquorate and the agenda is often light. As outlined above, it is also suggested that many of the items that appear on the CoP agenda, may be better considered by the full Authority.
  This committee’s current terms of reference also provide for the Authority’s urgency provisions. Some members have raised concerns relating to the Authority’s current method of dealing with urgent issues as outlined in standing orders. A proposal could be to establish an Urgency Panel (see below).
  It is proposed however, to retain the current process of holding ‘informal sessions’ after CoP meetings, to which all members are invited, although attendance by non- CoP members is rare.
• Urgency Panel
  Current arrangements for dealing with urgent issues are outlined the Authority’s standing orders.
  Provision is made for CoP Committee to carry out the Authority’s urgency function. Where this cannot be undertaken provision is made for the Clerk and/or Treasurer, in consultation with the Chair of the Authority, to make delegated decisions.
  It may be felt that this function would be better carried out by an ‘Urgency Panel’. This Panel could consist of the Chair and the Deputy Chairs of the Authority and could be convened as required. There maybe scope for the business of this Panel to be dealt with by ‘e’ mail or telephone.
• Finance Committee
  This Committee currently meets monthly and no changes to existing arrangements are proposed.
• Standards Committee
  No change in current arrangements is proposed for this Committee.
• Human Resources Committee
• Equality and Diversity Board
• Planning, Performance and Review Committee
• Professional Standards and Complaints Committee
• Consultation Committee
  These Committees currently meet on a bi-monthly basis.
  Clearly there are various permutations by which committee functions could be amalgamated. Members are asked to indicate if they wish to make any changes. In doing so, the current weight of business handled by each committee should be borne in mind and whether there are logical alternative homes for a committee’s functions.
  Any amalgamation of committees would require strong agenda management. Some members have suggested that each committee should be required to develop yearly work programmes to assist agenda management.
• Audit Panel/Risk Management/Health and Safety
  An issue that members need to consider relates to ‘risk management’. Currently, this issue is considered by Finance Committee and sometimes CoP. To ensure that this matter is given a higher priority, a new committee could be established that covers this and other corporate governance issue. This corporate governance committee could also consider audit and health and safety matters meeting on a quarterly basis, replacing the current Audit Panel and Health and Safety Sub-Committee.
  Members of Finance Committee (on 22 April) considered the issue of risk management/audit issues and supported a move for these issue to be considered under a separate committee.
• ACPO Conduct/Pension Forfeiture
  Members may see the benefit of amalgamating these two sub-committee to form a ‘Casework’ Committee, which would meet bi-monthly. The original proposals for this are attached is Appendix 2

C. Race and equality impact

There are no direct race and equality implications

D. Financial implications

There are no direct financial implications

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Nick Baker, Head of Committee Services, MPA.

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 2

Appendix 2 is a previously published report presented to the Professional Standards & Complaints Committee – 11 September 2003 titled Casework Committee

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback