[Dave Mckenna]

I was going to ask a very similar question - very interested in anyone who has used e petitons in a scrutiny context or who reacts to them via scrutiny.

[Keith Gordon]

I am not able to help with Diane's query as we are at much the same stage; looking for possible systems but I would also be very interested in hearing others' experiences.

Keith

[Peter Marrington]

Try speaking to Lambeth, they seem pretty well established using Mod.Gov

[Tracey Tiff]

Hi Diane

I too would be very keen to receive any information that you gather on this.

Thanks in advance

Tracy

Tracy Tiff

Scrutiny Officer

Northampton Borough Council

[John Ross]

Diane,

Good subject.

Stoke has done a lot of work on the link between scrutiny items and petitions - it

offers great - if selective - potential for genuine topics from communities to enliven

a scrutiny work programme.

However we are on the cusp of epetitions. Bristol are one of the more advanced in

terms of epetitioning - their website is worth a look.

There is also a community of practice website with more info at

http://www.communities.idea.gov.uk/c/2195982/home.do

Any questions pls call

Best wishes john 01782 232956

[Mark Grimshaw]

Hello,

As this is mildly related i thought i better put this in here rather than start a new topic. I'm currently looking at thresholds for responding to petitions, especially in light of the recent 'consultation on draft statutory guidance on the duty to respond to petitions' paper. The Government are suggesting that a petition with over 1,500 signatures requires a debate in full council and similarly a petition with at least 750 signatures can pull in an officer to give evidence. Has anyone given any thought to these figures or thresholds in general? Does anyone have any useful information on current practice? Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Mark

[Laura Follows]

Mark - I've done some work on this for my masters dissertation. It looked at modelling a petitions procedure based on the number of signatures they received - and trying to find a role for them in full council without having to make constitutional amendments. If you're interested I can email you a brief version of the suggested procedure and rationale behind it.

[Peter Marrington]

Sorry for a basic question but when do we need to have e petitions up and running by??

[Tim Bowers]

peter marrington Wrote:Sorry for a basic question but when do we need to have e petitions up and running by??

Sorry, I can't find any hints as to when the Government would prefer to introduce the requirement for e-petitions either. Perhaps the Government is keeping an open mind and will consider the answers to Q11 of the consultation (which is about timescales for the petitions duty as a whole). Given the need for the Government to consider the responses to the consultation and then issue a revised draft order, it is going to be very tight for councils to introduce a non-e petition system by May 2010, let alone an electronic one.

I understand that the marketplace for e-petition systems is still quite undeveloped, and - whilst acknowledging the work that several trail-blazing councils have evidently already done - it will take at least a year for councils to acquire systems that will do the job at a reasonable price. The logical thing would arguably be for both non-electronic and electronic systems to be introduced together in May 2011 at the earliest, but this is pure supposition on my part.

Bearing in mind that the Conservatives have said they will repeal the 2009 Act if they form the next government, a later date could prevent a lot of abortive work and unnecessary expenditure.

[Paul Ansell]

Sorry - my post just now about timescales was anonymous because the system logged me out when I got interrupted in the middle of it. It was, I confess, from me.