In accordance with Chapter 2, Part 2 (Rule 15) of the Council’s Constitution.

The Motion, as printed in the Agenda was proposed by Councillor Duffin and seconded by Councillor Aker. The Motion read as follows:

Thurrock Council calls upon the government to introduce legislation to provide for a right of "Real Recall" of underperforming local government councillors on grounds similar to those put before parliament when MPs debated “Real Recall” in 2014.

Councillor Duffin introduced the Motion, and in doing so, explained that if legislation was passed Thurrock Council could then work to implement “Real Recall”.

Councillor Duffin explained that if a councillor was underperforming the Council would be able to deal with the matter instantly and not have to wait for their four year term to finish. The recall mechanism would potentially see 20 per cent of registered voters campaigning to get a councillor removed for the following situations:

•           Misconduct

•           Failure to Represent

•           Crossing the Floor

•           Breaking Electoral Promises

This motion was to put the power back in the hands of the voters.

A proposed amendment to the Motion had been submitted by Councillor Hebb and seconded by Councillor Gledhill. The amended Motion read as follows:

Thurrock Council calls upon the government to introduce legislation to provide for a right of "Recall" of local government councillors, alongside Thurrock Council also exploring the possibilities to introduce its own local recall scheme.

Councillor Hebb introduced his amendment and stated that it was an important matter to consider and that it was announced at Council last year as an Administration policy to ensure that councillors who do not behave were held to account.

The amendment was made to ensure that the work already undertaken by the Council had not been overlooked.

Councillor J Kent stated that he would be supporting the amendment and stated that the principal behind Recall was right. He stated that over the past 20 years the vast majority of elected members of all parties had stood for election to do the best they could to improve the area they lived in. Councillor J Kent stated that if recall was brought in it would be used very rarely. He stated that the current six month rule can be waivered when health matters were involved and that the current regime could be tightened up. The council could also publish the casework undertaken by councillors to show their activity in office.  Councillor J Kent went on further to say that some transparency was needed to give residents the tools to hold councillors to account which they currently do not have.

Councillor Aker stated that he supported Councillor Duffin’s motion and told members that if the Real Recall were to pass he believed that it would never get used. Having agreed with Councillor J Kent’s comment that people get involved with politics for the right reasons Councillor Aker felt that the passing of this motion would demonstrate that councillors were already happy to hold members to account.

At 9.15pm, the Mayor moved a motion to suspend Council Procedure Rule 11.1 to allow the meeting to continue beyond the 2.5 hour time limit until completion of business. Members indicated their disagreement to the proposal and that the meeting should finish at 9.30pm.

Councillor Gledhill also agreed with Councillor Kent’s comments and stated that some clarity would be required on what was being done by a councillor and how often this was done. Councillor Gledhill stated that he was in favour of Recall and that it would be used very rarely and would need to be thought through properly which could then be used as a good example for other councils to use. Councillor Gledhill was in favour of the amendment and looked forward to discussing it at the Constitution Working Group and to ensure that residents had an input.

Councillor Hebb stated that all parties were in agreement in a higher accountability of councillors and although there would be a long way to go he stated Thurrock Council should make a start and put Thurrock on the map for open democracy.

Councillor Duffin summed up by confirming that it was 20 per cent of registered voters in the initial motion and not 5 per cent as Councillor Hebb quoted. Councillor Duffin stated that if the Amendment was passed, he would vote against the Bill as this did not allow voters to recall anyone. The amendment did nothing to resolve the issue and urged members to vote in favour of the original motion.

Councillor Duffin requested a requisition vote be undertaken.

The Mayor called a vote on Councillor Hebb’s amendment.

Upon being put to the vote, 28 Members voted in favour of the Amendment with 16 Members voted against, whereupon the Mayor declared the Amendment carried.

Councillor Duffin stated that his request for a requisition vote be withdrawn.

The Mayor called a vote on the Motion as amended.

Following a clear majority in favour, the Mayor declared the Amended Motion carried.