Somebody help me! Why would the councils breach their constitutions, fail to follow the correct process and pressurise councillors over a question of restructuring that they would have won anyway. And if they are prepared to go to such lengths, how concerned should we be? It surely isn’t a good thing.
The following is a summary from what I know and I highlight issues that I see as curious or odd about what I see.
The Deal
East Midlands Devolution Deal 2023
In August 2022 Derby City Council, along with four others, agreed with the government to the East Midlands Combined County Authority Deal. At this point it was all done behind closed doors and without consulting the majority of the hundreds of councillors or the political groups covering the area. This was signed by the four leaders and an MP. The deal sets out the steps that are required to bring about the new body. It states on the front and subsequent pages that the deal needs to be ratified by the four councils. a consultation process completed and some legislation creation. While this is probably a normal way to do things I’m sure it could have been done in a more positive, engaging and open way.
When looking for the date of the deal I had to go to page 6, an odd location as signatures and headers are normally where the documents date resides. Something like we the undersigned on the date of xxx and in the presence of witnesses agree to etc instead we just find an odd page that states signatures: and contains five signatures, no date, no statement. To me the signatures look electronic, different pens, different qualities and carefully placed. This does not look like it was signed in person or in wet ink. Was it witnessed? When did they sign? It raises questions but either way, the document later states..
“10.As a Mayoral Combined County Authority, the East Midlands will be a key partner of central government to drive regional growth and productivity, joining the existing MCAs in engagement with the Government from the date of this deal – 30 August 2022.”
What I also find odd is that the statement appears to bring into being the authority and it’s powers before ratification and process required in other paragraphs. It effectively says that from this day forward it’s a thing where maybe it should say that the authority comes into being at the appropriate point of due process.
The First Meeting Of Councillors
October / November 2022 the four councils had full council meetings to agree to a draft proposal.
There was a single vote on the agenda and the vote covered 4 recommendations. The first two most important ones were;
2.1 approve the draft Proposal attached at Appendix 1 to this report to create an East Midlands Combined County Authority (EMCCA) for the areas of Derbyshire County, Derby City, Nottinghamshire County and Nottingham City;
2.2 formally consult upon the draft Proposal with the residents and other stakeholders of Derby and the wider EMCCA area, in partnership with Derbyshire County Council, Nottinghamshire County Council and Nottingham City Council;
While the points are linked, the scope covered by the single vote is large. This was the first and only time the draft proposal was put before the council. The proposal is not the signed deal document but rather a different document building on the deal. I have three problems with this meeting.
A Referendum was not allowed to be brought to the chamber
The legal officer said it wasn’t allowed… There is no legal reason why we couldn’t have had a referendum. While it is not included in the path to create the authority we could have done it with no delay to the timetable and minimal cost, running inline with local elections and completing before the consultation a referendum would have assisted the council in their decision making, as referendums are meant to.
We Were Not Allowed To Discuss The Draft Proposal
As you see the first item is the draft proposal. Never before have I been blocked from discussing the substantive motion, the first item on the agenda. The Mayor at the time, who was clearly under instruction and pressure said that we were not there to discuss the draft proposal, a phrase he repeated through the meeting. When this became clear we left in protest but he continued his stance to all parties. I raised a complaint against the mayor and monitoring officer which of course was dismissed. He also stated that we get opportunity to scrutinise and discuss the proposal at a later time. Once agreed however the council has no power to change it. He was deliberately misleading the chamber. My complaint is below.
The Signed Deal Was Not Ratified
Remember, the deal document is subject to ratification. That means bringing it to the full chamber for a vote. If you check the agenda we have no vote for the signed deal and it is not included in the supporting documents. If you look closely, the draft proposal has a title that says Deal and a single link to the document on the governments website. This does not fulfill any requirements for a printed document. Agreeing the proposal is NOT the same as ratifying the deal as some would try to argue. The two documents are very different, one builds on the other and it’s omittance from the meeting agenda, minutes and supporting documents would exclude that argument in my opinion.
The Second Meeting of Councillors
March 2023 the four councils met individually to agree to submit the final proposal and consultation results to the government.
Derby City Council Agenda March 2023
Consultation Results Were Not Positive
The idea of a consultation is to listen to the public but as normal that statutory consultation was made and the results were ignored. Even though the questions tried to frame a positive outcome the results showed that people do not want a Mayor.
The Signed Deal Was Not Ratified
Again, the deal was not present for a vote or supplied as a supporting document for it to be ratified. The proposal simply includes…
8 The Deal
East Midlands devolution deal (publishing.service.gov.uk)
The Third Meeting Of Councillors
A final meeting was taken to agree to the creation of the legislation that would bring the combined authority into existence.
Derby City Council Agenda December 2023
Undue Pressure on the Mayor
Since May 2023 the Mayor has been Alan Graves of the Reform Derby Party. It is known that he is against the combined authority and is likely to be the Reform UK candidate for the role. A week before the meeting the CEO and Head of Democratic Services called Alan into a special meeting. I wasn’t present but pressure was applied on Alan to not vote on the matter. He says they told him he couldn’t vote as it would be open to challenge. Further clarification was sought from the officers but I haven’t seen their reply. Alan then asked other candidates across the counties in similar positions what their advice was. They, being for the deal, had no legal issues with voting. Alan took the decision to use his vote.
Still No Ratification of the Deal
In the days before the meeting I worked long and hard researching to create a suitable speech and put in anything I could, to make the debate even slightly less than one sided. At 2.30 I finally understood the potential importance of not ratifying the signed deal, researched the previous votes and paperwork and adjusted my speech. I then decided to raise a point of order ( law ) and we also added in an amendment for a referendum, something that had previously been denied debate. During the meeting the Legal Officer Emily Feenan assured the chamber that the deal had been ratified in March and the meeting continued. A vote was taken and the chamber agreed to create the legislation thereby completing all steps to create the combined authority…. except the first and most important, the ratification of the signed deal.
It’s not supplied in the supporting documents and no vote was taken on the signed document.
Obviously I have asked for a response from the CEO and the head of Legal on the matter providing them with the fact that the deal has not been voted upon or supplied as a document to the chamber. I have received a reply that says it’s all been completed correctly.
My Conclusion
While the choice of the councillors in Derby is clear, so is the choice of the people and it appears to me that the legal steps required to create the authority have not been completed. In fact serious breaches of the constitution may have occurred along the way. While there may be no benefit in it, in my opinion, this leaves the creation of the authority completely open to legal challenge.
A full independent enquiry should be conducted into the potential abuse of power and constitutional breaches that so plagued this process. Appropriate action needs to be taken.
