Transition from Committee to Cabinet System

Background and Context

By Lilla Cartwright, Programme Manager for Innovation and Anthony Soyinka, Head of Democratic Services

Brighton & Hove is a nationally and internationally recognised coastal and cultural destination, known for its heritage, diversity, and vibrant environmental and cultural offer. From 2003 to May 2023, the city operated with No Overall Control. Over this period, the Council principally operated under a committee system.

During this period, both officers and Members developed deep institutional experience with the committee model. However, without overall political control, the Council did not have wide knowledge of executive governance, cabinet leadership, or formal scrutiny processes.

In May 2023 the local elections delivered the city’s first majority administration in over two decades. With 66% of Members newly elected and new to local government, the shift prompted a fundamental reassessment of governance arrangements.

On 28 March 2024, the Council resolved to move to a leader and cabinet model, to be implemented at the Annual Council Meeting on 16 May 2024. The objective was to establish a more efficient, transparent, and accountable decision-making structure aligned with the Council’s “One Council” ambition to join up services and improve public engagement.

The challenge for us was significant. After two decades without overall control, the Council lacked institutional experience of operating a cabinet governance model. There were no internal playbooks, no guidance materials, and no relevant digital learning resources.

This wasn’t just a steep learning curve. It was a full reset.

With limited internal capacity and tight budgets, the Council reached out for external support. Advice from authorities like Camden, Barnet (recently moved from the Committee System to Cabinet) and Bristol (recently moved from Cabinet to Committee system) provided valuable input. They shared cabinet models, timelines, and governance frameworks that helped us shape Brighton & Hove’s approach.

In partnership with CfGS, the Council developed a flexible, comprehensive training offer. This included tailored sessions on transitioning from committee to cabinet, delivered separately to officers and Members to allow for open dialogue. Training also covered scrutiny principles, the role of the “critical friend,” and distinctions between executive and non-executive functions. Hybrid delivery and recorded sessions ensured accessibility and ongoing development.

Outcomes and Impact

Straight away, one of the most tangible improvements has been the Council’s ability to forward plan. The previous committee system lacked the structured planning needed for effective pre-decision scrutiny. In contrast, the leader and cabinet model has introduced greater clarity, consistency, and discipline in scheduling decisions.

We’re now routinely publishing decisions one to two months ahead, with a long-term aim of a full-year forward plan. This enhances scrutiny and supports better engagement with members, officers, and residents ahead of decisions.

Scrutiny is still developing. We’re taking early steps and making progress, for example, task and finish group reviews have received positive feedback. Our first annual scrutiny report is in preparation and scheduled for October 2025.

Organisationally, the regular rhythm has improved report timelines, aligned officer-member schedules, and created a more stable workflow.

For opposition members, the change represents a cultural shift and there is ongoing learning and development of our arrangements to support this.

From a resident’s perspective, the cabinet model makes clear who is responsible, for instance, transport issues now visibly sit with the Cabinet Member for Transport.

Looking back, the transition began in uncertainty and anxiety. Training and external support were transformative – boosting clarity, confidence, and understanding across members and officers. New Cabinet and scrutiny members now have a firmer grasp of roles and expectations. While there’s more work to do, especially around scrutiny, the fear of the unknown has passed and we’re moving forward on firmer ground.

Lessons Learned

For Members, confidence has grown measurably since the initial stages.

For officers, the change has brought a steep learning curve. Under the committee system, identifying where a decision should go often involved repeated consultations or deep dives into the Constitution. The leader and cabinet model has significantly reduced that ambiguity. Officers now assess whether a decision belongs to Full Council or Cabinet, applying clearer thresholds like financial significance or public impact to determine its path.

That said, the shift hasn’t come without operational challenges. One key lesson has been the importance of forward planning. Previously, reports could be submitted with short notice. That is no longer viable under the cabinet system, where key decisions require 28 days’ notice. This demands a major shift in mindset: thinking ahead, submitting earlier, and ensuring clearance through CLT and informal Cabinet discussions before formal scheduling.

This discipline has strengthened internal planning and led to more robust, better-thought-through decisions. Officers are more mindful of governance requirements, and we’ve seen a noticeable improvement in how business is programmed. We’ve also been clear that urgency must be justified — general exception or special urgency notices are the exception, not the norm, embedding a culture of responsibility and forward-thinking.

Another key takeaway has been the value of asking for help. Being honest about where we lack capacity or knowledge and reaching out was transformative. That willingness to collaborate and admit we didn’t have all the answers was essential early on and remains vital now. The transition isn’t something you “tick off.” It’s a process of continuous learning. A year later, we’re still building on insights from the early stages: developing training, deepening subject knowledge, and expanding our support offer. Relationships, openness, and shared learning has to continue.

Ultimately, the key lesson has been that clear processes and defined roles bring clarity  and that building organisational capacity for governance takes time, investment, and a collective willingness to adapt.

Future Directions

As we continue our learning journey, there is still significant scope to develop how scrutiny is embedded across the organisation. While collaboration between officers and members is strong, effective scrutiny isn’t about holding more meetings. It’s about improving the quality, purpose, and impact of those engagements.

There’s a recognition that scrutiny should be more than a procedural requirement. It must shape decisions and hold leadership to account. Task and finish groups, for example, have shown promise in delivering focused, purposeful scrutiny.

We’re also drawing on learning from other councils. Some have broader panel structures, while others are more streamlined. Our experience shows there’s no one-size-fits-all. What matters is a scrutiny model that is fit for purpose and responsive to our community.

“We see it as a valuable opportunity for early collaboration — through forward planning, informal discussions, and shared understanding — to shape better decisions together and reduce the need for reactive measures like call-ins.”

Looking ahead, we are committed to embedding pre-decision scrutiny more systematically into our processes. This will require a cultural shift, along with greater forward planning of decisions. Moving from a two-month to a four to six-month planning horizon will help scrutiny to be timelier and more aligned with key decision points.

Improving visibility and accessibility is equally important. By aligning scrutiny with Cabinet cycles and providing earlier notice of upcoming items, we can enable more meaningful engagement from residents and stakeholders. This is not just about meeting statutory requirements. It is about setting a higher standard for openness and participation.

Ultimately, our aim is to build on the progress made and continue developing scrutiny into a core driver of accountability, innovation and better outcomes for our communities.

At CfGS, we support local government improvement by working closely with councils to highlight the great work being done including case studies of recent improvement activity funded by Government.

As part of this support, we produce case studies to share the lessons learned from these projects, helping other authorities benefit from the insights gained. These case studies are a collaborative effort between CfGS and the councils involved, and while they provide valuable perspectives, they are not formal evaluations of the work’s impact. Instead, they aim to inspire and inform other authorities with real examples of progress that can have a wider impact across the sector.