Agenda item

(A report by John Medler, Assistant Director – Governance & Monitoring Officer)

Councillor Paul Gleeson, as Chair of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee, introduced the report, which had been considered by the Committee at its meeting on 10th February 2026. The report recommended an amendment to Council Procedure Rule 11.2, limiting Members to submitting one question only to Full Council per meeting, while retaining the right to ask one supplementary question. A copy of the Monitoring Officer’s report was attached as Appendix 1 within the report.

The proposed amendment had been brought forward following advice from the Monitoring Officer, who had confirmed that the  proposal  could be considered by the Council on receipt of a  the committee’s recommendation and the Monitoring Officer’s report. The intention of the amendment was to support fairness, balance and efficiency during Full Council meetings, while ensuring Members continued to have access to a variety of scrutiny mechanisms.

A detailed discussion took place on the proposed amendment to limit Members to submitting one question per Full Council meeting. Several Members spoke in support of the change, explaining that recent meetings had seen large numbers of questions submitted by a very small number of Members, often close to the submission deadline. This had placed significant pressure on officer time and contributed to extended meetings, particularly when the Members submitting those questions did not attend to ask them.

Members reflected on the tone and conduct associated with questioning at recent meetings. Comments were made about occasions where supplementary questions had been used in ways perceived to be unconstructive, confrontational or politically motivated, and reference was made to instances of discourteous behaviour outside the Chamber. Members expressed concern that such behaviour detracted from productive debate and created an uncomfortable atmosphere for Members and officers alike.

Considerable discussion took place around the availability of alternative mechanisms for raising issues or seeking information. Members noted that many queries could be, and routinely were, resolved by emailing officers or speaking directly with Portfolio Holders. One Member cited their own experience that the majority of their questions had been answered fully through such informal channels, without the need to table them at Full Council.

As part of the debate, Members also explained that similar limits exist in many other local authorities, referencing that this approach was neither unusual nor restrictive. Several examples were mentioned, and Members noted that Lincolnshire County Council operates a comparable system, where Members are limited to one question at Full Council. This was presented as evidence that the proposed measure aligned with established and effective practice elsewhere, and that it would help bring Boston’s procedures in line with sector norms.

Further comments stressed the need to protect officer capacity, with Members acknowledging the significant time involved in preparing written responses to multiple questions, particularly when technical input was required from several service areas. Members welcomed the clarity that a one question limit would bring and felt it would encourage Members to prioritise the issues most important to them.

Some Members highlighted experiences of poor conduct and personalisation arising from recent questioning, including adversarial exchanges and inappropriate language outside the Chamber. Concerns were raised that such behaviour did not reflect the professional standards expected of elected Members. Supporters of the motion felt the amendment would promote a more focused, respectful and business like approach to question time.

While the importance of questioning as a tool for scrutiny and accountability was acknowledged, most Members who spoke felt that the amendment represented a fair and proportionate measure that balanced democratic engagement with effective meeting management and responsible use of officer time.

The recommendations were moved by Councillor Paul Gleeson and seconded by Councillor Alison Austin.

Resolved:

1.     That Council Procedure Rule 11.2 be amended so that a Member may submit one question only to Full Council per meeting;

2.     That the amendment take effect at the close of the Full Council meeting on 2^nd March 2026; and

3.     That the Monitoring Officer be authorised to update the Constitution and associated guidance documents to give effect to this change.

Before closing the meeting, the Mayor invited Members to sign a card conveying the Council’s best wishes to Councillor David Brown, who had recently experienced health issues. Members were thanked for their attendance and contribution to the meeting.