A group of councillors is challenging senior appointments made by Tees Valley Mayor, Lord Ben Houchen, as unconstitutional and potentially unlawful. Their action casts doubt on the positions of the new chairs of South Tees, Middlesbrough and Hartlepool development corporations.
The new chairs were appointed by Houchen following his resignations from all three positions under political pressure from the government after it issued a best value notice (BVN) on Tees Valley Combined Authority (TVCA) in April.
But as reported by North East Bylines on 23 June, there was confusion and contradiction over who had authority to appoint his successors – the mayor or the cabinet. Tees Valley previously used powers under the Localism Act 2011 as amended by the TVCA (Functions) Order 2017, which gave these powers to the cabinet, though on a proposal by the mayor. But on 27 June it reverted to the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009, giving the power to make these appointments solely to the mayor.
All three mayoral appointments were duly “noted” by the TVCA cabinet in line with an official recommendation. The necessary constitutional changes were also made.
Scrutiny committee calls for “proper procedures”
Now seven councillors – all Labour – from the TVCA overview and scrutiny committee (OSC), including at least one from each of Tees Valley’s five local authorities, have stepped in with a written request – obtained by Ray Casey of North East Bylines – to call-in the relevant cabinet decisions. This would give them the right to refer a decision back to the cabinet for reconsideration or recommend changes or further consultation.
The seven complain that the mayor’s appointments were made without formal cabinet votes and the changes to the constitution were not treated as strategic decisions requiring unanimous approval, in direct conflict with the constitution.
They describe the \appointment of the development corporation chairs as “pre-emptive and potentially unlawful” and the interpretation of the law on these matters as “inadequate or selective”, with governance implications for all the constituent councils.
They add: “|These changes strip away local democratic oversight from all three development corporations without clear justification or adequate discussion at cabinet. The impacts on local accountability, especially where councils are landowners or community stakeholders (as in Hartlepool), were not sufficiently addressed”.
“Flawed process”
This move by the OSC seven follows an unsuccessful challenge at the cabinet meeting by Councillor Brenda Harrison, leaders of Hartlepool Council. According to the draft minutes:
“Councillor Harrison advised cabinet members that she had sent an objection to the TVCA monitoring [legal] officer with regards to the process for appointment of the chairs of the development corporations.” Councillor Harrison, according to the minutes, believed the process for appointing the chairs was flawed and it went against what the combined authority was trying to do, working together collaboratively.
The draft minutes go on: “The chair [Mayor Houchen] advised cabinet that the law states that the appointment of members to a development corporation and the appointment of chair is a mayoral power, but he had wanted to make the appointments in a collegiate way and obtain buy-in. There was an open application process and interview panels involving the chief operating officer [of Middlesbrough and Hartlepool development corporations], chief executive [of South Tees Development Corporation] and local authority chief executives.
“It was advised, “the draft minutes add, “that the development corporation and TVCA constitutions needed to be updated to reflect the law. Councillor Harrison queried whether permission from the Secretary of State was required for the appointment[s], and she was advised that this was not the case. Councillor Harrison noted that this reflects the need for cabinet members to receive further training on the TVCA constitution. It was reiterated that there will be a full review of the constitution and this will be done in a collaborative way with cabinet.” The seven OSC members are now waiting to see if their request for a call-in meets the necessary requirements, including number of signatories and political and geographical balance.
