LGA response to the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government remote meetings call for evidence, 10 June 2021

The Local Government Association (LGA) is the national voice of local government. We work with councils to support, promote and improve local government. We are a politically led, cross-party organisation that works on behalf of councils to ensure that the local government has a strong, credible voice with the national government. We aim to influence and set the political agenda on the issues that matter to councils so they can deliver local solutions to national problems. The LGA covers every part of England and Wales, supporting local government as the most efficient and accountable part of the public sector.

Over the past months, councils have been working hard to manage the pandemic, deal with local outbreaks, and roll out the vaccination programme while providing business as usual services. Over this consultation period, they have worked to progress to Stage 3 of the Roadmap, manage quarantine hotels, and receive arrivals from amber listed countries. They have also recently delivered a double set of COVID-secure elections and subsequent annual general meetings.

Councils are under significant pressure at this time. Due to this, it has not been possible for the LGA to comprehensively survey councils to gather national data for this call for evidence. However, we believe that we have sufficient qualitative data from our Remote council meetings temperature check and discussions with our member councils to respond.

• Over the past year, councils have conducted all of their council business virtually due to pandemic. Councils have reported that virtual meetings have allowed for critical decision to be made democratically and without delay during this period of emergency.
• Councils have noted a range of benefits of virtual meetings, which they hope to retain going forward through the option to continue virtual and hybrid meetings as and when it is deemed locally appropriate.
• Key benefits include the resilience of democratic processes and reduced reliance on delegating decisions to officers in times of crisis and flexibility, resulting in better councillor attendance and drastically increased resident engagement with council meetings.
• Councils also noted that physical meetings can be a barrier to attendance for some individuals and that virtual meetings can be more accessible. Disabled people and people with caring responsibilities or working commitments can find virtual meetings easier to access; this applies to residents and councillors alike.
• If the flexibility to hold online meetings is restored to councils it is essential that the government avoids being overly prescriptive about the circumstances under which councils can use virtual and hybrid meeting formats. Councils and councillors are best placed to decide how and when to use different meetings formats to balance the advantages and disadvantages of different meeting options and reflect the variety of local authority types and governance arrangements. Councils will need considerable flexibility for local determination as to how and when to utilise virtual and hybrid meetings to ensure they can realise the benefits of different meeting options to suit their local context.

Question 1: Generally speaking, how well do you feel the current remote meeting arrangements work?

• Very well
• Well
• Neither well nor poorly
• Poorly
• Very poorly
• Unsure

The arrangements in place until 7 May worked very well. Feedback from our member councils indicates that the ability to hold virtual meetings has been highly beneficial to councils, councillors and the public.

The provision of virtual meetings has allowed for critical decisions to be made democratically and without delay. It has increased the transparency of decision-making processes and the equity of access for elected members and the public.

Had this provision not been introduced in April 2020, there would have been a significant democratic deficit with all decisions being deferred to officers or not being made at all for a sustained period of time without elected representatives' input.

Question 2: Generally speaking, do you think local authorities in England should have the express ability to hold at least some meetings remotely on a permanent basis?

• Yes
• No
• Unsure

Yes, councils in England should have the express ability to hold virtual and hybrid meetings permanently. Further to this, councils should decide for themselves which meetings or circumstances under which a meeting can be virtual or hybrid.

If the flexibility to hold online meetings is restored to councils it is essential that the government avoids being overly prescriptive about the circumstances under which councils can use virtual and hybrid meeting formats. Councils and councillors are best placed to decide how and when to use different meetings formats to balance the advantages and disadvantages of different meeting options and reflect the variety of local authority types and governance arrangements. Councils will need considerable flexibility for local determination as to how and when to utilise virtual and hybrid meetings to ensure they can realise the benefits of different meeting options to suit their local context.

The openness and transparency requirements that already exist at a national level should guide how virtual and hybrid meetings should be conducted. Government should work with the sector to develop relevant guidance to help councils interpret these requirements in a virtual context.

Question 3: What do you think are some of the benefits of the remote meetings arrangements?

• More accessible for local authority members
• Reduction in travel time for councillors
• Meetings more easily accessed by local residents
• Greater transparency for local authority meetings
• Documents (e.g. minutes, agendas, supporting papers) are more accessible to local residents and others online
• Easier to chair meetings in an orderly fashion
• A virtual format promotes greater equality in speaking time during meetings
• I do not think there are any benefits to remote meetings
• Other (please specify)

The advantage of the Flexibility Regulations for remote meetings was that they allowed but did not require councils to meet virtually. This flexibility is key to realising the benefits of online meeting options. While it has been necessary for councillors to meet virtually due to the pandemic, councils have observed many benefits which they would like to retain through the option of virtual and hybrid meetings. The benefits outlined below relate to the virtual and hybrid meetings and illustrate the advantages of allowing councils the option to choose the most appropriate option for their local circumstances.

Virtual and hybrid meeting options are more accessible for local authority members.

• Virtual and hybrid meeting technology has improved drastically over the past year due to public demand, and councils have taken advantage of this to hold the full range of council meetings virtually. Most councillors already had the required equipment and technological capability to access virtual meetings. Where this was not the case, councils have supported councillors with training to engage with virtual meetings. Due to the ease of access and the ability to join meetings from any location with a suitable internet connection, member attendance has improved over the past year as councillors have attended meetings they would usually have had to miss.
• Councils have given poor weather, distance, transport and travel time as examples of why virtual and hybrid meetings are more accessible than physical meetings alone. They commented that this particularly affected councillors in rural areas, disabled councillors, working councillors and those with caring responsibilities. Some councils have described this as 'levelling the playing field' and reducing the barriers to attending meetings for councillors and residents with different needs. The impact of this is that councils could make quorate decisions, with more local input from councillors who might otherwise have struggled to engage in as many meetings.

Virtual and hybrid meetings can reduce travel time for councillors.

• Members have reported that the flexibility to join meetings from a different location has reduced the amount of time they spend travelling and allowed them to work more efficiently. In a recent LGA survey, we heard that some councillors have 40-mile round trips to attend council meetings and that this is a barrier to consistent attendance. Reduction in travel time has resulted in the following benefits:
  • Councillor attendance has improved over the last year, increasing the participation of councillors and reducing democratic deficit. Virtual attendance is beneficial for councillors who have work commitments, caring responsibilities, mobility impairment, and live far away from the usual meeting venue. In a COVID-specific context, this has helped councillors who are particularly at risk from COVID-19 to continue to represent their residents at council meetings.
  • Reduced vehicle use and transport also have a positive impact on CO2 emissions related to each meeting. This is a significant step towards achieving net-zero emissions for councils. One council estimated that member's mileage had reduced by approximately 60 thousand miles over the last year, roughly equating to 6 tons of carbon emissions.
  • Virtual meetings have allowed more efficient use of councillor time. Virtual meetings are very simple to set up allowing meetings to be pulled together very quickly. This can be helpful and more efficient than physical meetings when an urgent matter needs to be discussed but may not need a lot of time for discussion. Virtual and hybrid sets ups also allow for attendees to be brought in at short notice, even within the meeting if necessary. Due to this increased flexibility and efficiency, councillors have attended council meetings more consistently and attended other relevant meetings like local meetings and surgeries more easily.
• Overall, the impact of improved accessibility and transparency of meetings is that it is easier for residents to have oversight of council business and decision-making and hold their elected members to account for their decisions.
• Councils are attempting to retain a portion of these benefits by maximising the opportunities for officers to attend council meetings virtually, particularly where councils have moved to home working structures. However, further efficiencies could be made if councils were given the option to use virtual and hybrid meeting formats when that is the best option.

Virtual meetings are more easily accessed by local residents.

• Many councils have reported an increase in resident attendance at virtual council meetings compared to physical meetings. Those who did not broadcast or put up recordings of their council meetings before the pandemic have dramatically increased viewership, implying that more people are willing to engage with virtual than physical meetings. However, this increase also occurred for some councils that webcast or uploaded their meetings online before the pandemic. One council reported an 84 per cent increase of views of the same period in 2019 and 2020. It is not possible to be definitive about the cause of this increase; it might be due to the improved video quality of online meeting technology or the normalisation of online meeting technology during the pandemic, making them seem more accessible. What is clear is that more people appear to be willing to attend a virtual meeting.
• Improvement of the available technology has allowed some councils to provide a range of viewing options and level the playing field for disabled participants and those with work or caring commitments. Some councils were previously only able to stream their meetings live but could not offer a playback/on-demand option. Investment in the provision of online solutions during the pandemic has meant this on-demand option is easier to achieve, allowing people who are unavailable at the time of the meeting to observe later, for example people who work during the usual time of the meeting. One council we spoke to found that on-demand viewing is three times more popular than live viewing, reaching a much larger audience. Accessibility of online recorded and live material is also improving all the time, with live captioning becoming a more common feature of online platforms and may be more accessible than physical meeting for those with hearing impairments. Similarly, the requirement to use microphones during online meetings may improve the sound quality for visually impaired attendees compared to acoustic meetings.
• Many councils have also reported an increase in residents wishing to actively participate in council meetings now that they do not have to attend the meeting in person. Virtual attendance allows for a wider group of people to engage directly with council meetings where previously barriers existed. While virtual meetings are not permitted, someone who wants to address a particular committee but cannot leave their home for medical reasons will have to make arrangements to attend by proxy by having a representative or a council officer read out their prepared statement. This is a poor substitute when there is simple technology available to address this issue.
• Councils are currently required to provide public access to meetings. However, initial feedback since the 7 May indicates that very few members of the public are opting to physically attend when virtual methods are available. What is clear is that online meetings are a common work and social norm now, and the public may expect this kind of accessibility for council meetings as well.

Virtual and hybrid meetings could provide greater transparency for local authority meetings

• Transparency is an essential principle of local democracy. Residents should be able to understand when, where and how decisions are being made and how they can engage with that decision-making process. Councils are required to publish a notice of the time and place of the meeting five days ahead of a council meeting and must outline the items for discussion in a summons to the relevant members. Decision-making meetings must be open to the public, although matters on the agenda may be designated as confidential and the public can be excluded in certain limited circumstances.
• As per the 1972 Act, council meetings are technically open to everyone to attend. However, public attendance at council meetings is generally low, meaning that the level of awareness and scrutiny of those decisions by the public may also be low. To improve public awareness and create greater transparency about how and why local decisions are made, it would be beneficial to address the barriers to public engagement by providing a greater range of options for engagement.
• The provision of on-demand services may also support transparency allowing people to review council meetings after the fact. Some councils have reported that council business conducted virtually has been better reported by local media and newspapers, increasing the visibility and transparency of decisions even further.

Documents for council meetings are more accessible to local residents and others online and should be available in various formats to ensure that no one is excluded from accessing them. We do not see this as a direct benefit of having online or hybrid meetings. However, we have heard from some councils that the increase in interest in council meetings has led to them improving access to their council papers, for example linking to them from their on-demand council meeting page, making them easier for the public to locate.

Other benefits of having the flexibility to run virtual meetings:

• Virtual and hybrid meetings provide flexibility in times of emergency. At the beginning of the pandemic, councils did not have the flexibility to run online council meetings. In the immediate aftermath of the stay at home order, councils relied on delegating decision-making to officers to keep councils functioning. Delegated decision-making is an important tool ensuring councils are resilient in emergency situations like natural disasters, terrorist attacks, or risk of infection or exposure. However, these arrangements are a second-best option compared to decisions made by democratically elected members. They should only be used when there is no alternative and for short periods of time. Using them over a long period of time could create a democratic deficit where elected members cannot make or influence decisions that affect their residents.
• Since 7 May, councils have been back in the position where they must meet to make decisions even though social distancing is still in place and there is still a risk of infection. Practically this means that many councils have had to make alternative arrangements, either by using delegated powers again, by having informal virtual non-decision-making meetings before smaller decision-making meetings or procuring larger premises at high additional cost to the council. We have heard from councils of the significant additional costs of running recent Annual General Meetings, including over £8 thousand for a single meeting. Additional costs of meeting in person will continue to mount up for councils if, for any reason, further relaxations of restrictions are delayed, or restrictions are reintroduced at a local or national level. Some councils have also fed back that because of social distancing they having to use non-optimal venues for meetings, for example, using large gym or multi-use locations.
• Beyond the immediate practical implications of this return to face-to-face meetings, this means that councils are again unable to prepare for potential future pandemics. The Cabinet Office's Pandemic Influenza Checklist tells businesses they should consider how to modify the frequency or type of face-to-face meetings in the event of a pandemic and consider video or teleconferencing instead. Councils do not have this option and need to wait for legislation to be introduced before meeting virtually. The document also says businesses should allocate resources to ensure appropriate technology infrastructure is available to allow their employees to work from home. Councils conceivably could put aside funds and prepare infrastructure for committee meetings to be held virtually in the event of another pandemic. However, given the pressures on council budgets, it is unlikely they could put funds towards infrastructure if it could not be utilised immediately.
• Virtual meetings are more compatible with the green agenda. As mentioned earlier, reducing travel to and from council meetings has had a beneficial impact on CO2 emissions associated with council meetings, but there are also other green benefits. Virtual council meetings are associated with less paper waste as paper agendas are not provided by the council to those attending virtually. Some councils highlighted the reduction in power used to light and heat large public spaces used for council meetings. Continuing to hold some meetings virtually or providing hybrid options would allow councils to continue to make some energy savings. Changes to travel and energy expenditure have reduced costs associated with council meetings over the past year. This is explored more in Qu 4.
• Allowing virtual attendance at council meetings may remove a barrier to diverse and inclusive councils. The ideal council would reflect the makeup of the local community and would be able to address barriers to equal participation. According to the most recent national councillor census in 2018, this is not the case. 96 per cent of English councillors described themselves as white compared to 86 per cent of the population, 36 per cent described themselves as female compared to 50 per cent of the population, and 26 per cent were in employment compared to 75 per cent of the population.
• As part of the narrowing inequalities priority, the LGA works with our member authorities to develop the diversity of electoral candidates and councillors through our Be a Councillor campaign and Next Generation programme. The requirement to attend meetings in person has previously been identified as a barrier to certain groups running for election; this includes full-time workers, individuals with caring responsibilities, and disabled people. According to the Local Government Commission Report 2016, 26 per cent of women found that childcare was a barrier to performing their role as councillor, 47 per cent reported clashes with other caring commitments, and 32 per cent aged between 35-44 said childcare was often a problem, whilst other caring commitments was a more significant issue for women over 45.
• At this stage, it is not possible to assess whether the introduction of virtual meetings during the pandemic improved the attendance rate of women at council meetings. However, providing the flexibility for councillors to join meetings from where is most convenient for them would provide councils with the tools to address this significant barrier to participation and encourage a greater diversity of candidates and councillors in the future.
• Councils have also described how removing the flexibility for councils to hold online and hybrid meetings is out of step with the digital and information society in which councils now operate. Here the government has the opportunity to allow councils to take advantage of currently available and future technology and strengthen participation from those whose primary method of engagement is digital.

Question 4: (For local authorities only) Have you seen a reduction in costs since implementing remote meetings in your authority?

• Yes
• No
• Unsure

Yes, many councils report a reduction of cost since implementing remote meetings specifically around:

• Travel costs – many councils have saved significant amounts of money through the reduction in travel expenses for councillors attending meetings. One council has reported savings of £28 thousand just in travel costs.
• Lighting and heating cost – many councils have similarly saved money as they have not had to use lighting or heating in council meeting rooms.
• Printing costs – some councils reported savings in terms of printing costs, although the majority felt this was more of a gain for the green agenda rather than a substantial cost saving.

Question 5: What do you think are some of the disadvantages of the remote meetings arrangements, and do you have any suggestions for how they could be mitigated/overcome?

• It is harder for members to talk to one another informally
• Meetings are less accessible for local authority members or local residents who have a poor-quality internet connection
• Meetings are less accessible for local authority members or local residents who are unfamiliar with video conferencing/technology
• There is less opportunity for local residents to speak or ask questions
• Some find it more difficult to read documents online than in a physical format
• Debate is restricted by the remote format
• It is more difficult to provide effective opposition or scrutiny in a remote format
• It is more difficult to chair meetings in an orderly fashion
• Virtual meetings can be more easily dominated by individual speakers
• It might enable democratically elected members to live and perform their duties outside their local area on a permanent basis, therefore detaching them from the communities they serve
• It may create too substantial a division between the way national democracy (e.g. in the House of Commons) and local democracy is conducted
• I do not think there are any disadvantages to remote meetings
• Other (please specify)

There is a range of disadvantages to the enforced or exclusive use of fully remote meetings for all council meetings. However, there are no disadvantages to providing councils with the flexibility to hold virtual and hybrid meetings. This power would allow councils to use virtual and hybrid meeting options when appropriate to their local circumstances. Providing multiple ways to access council meetings can support engagement from a wider range of the community, increasing local awareness and scrutiny of council business.

We would also like to address some of the potential disadvantages listed in the consultations document:

• Informal conversation is not the primary purpose of council meetings. However, it is accepted that councillors may use formal meetings as an occasion to complete other business like catching up with colleagues. Informal conversation can also happen across a range of other existing and emerging platforms. In the future, online platforms may play more of a role in facilitating informal communication than previously.
• Poor-quality internet connection may be an issue with online meetings but is not an insurmountable obstacle. Information technologies are constantly improving, and poor connectivity is only a disadvantage if there is no other way to access the meeting. Flexibility to attend a meeting in person if connectivity is unreliable would mitigate this issue.
• Unfamiliarity with video conferencing/technology may be an issue with online meetings, but again this is not insurmountable. Over the past year, councils have provided training and support to ensure councillors could access online meetings. The LGA has also provided support through our Online and Hybrid meetings hub. If the option for online meetings were to continue, councils would continue to work to ensure councillors were able to access meetings in whatever format necessary. Unfamiliarity with the technology need not be a barrier for residents either, if there are other ways to access the meeting, for example, by providing in-person attendance options.
•   There is no clear evidence that debate is more restricted by the virtual format, that virtual meetings are more difficult to chair or that individual speakers more easily dominate virtual meetings. Many councillors have reported the opposite and that virtual meetings have levelled the playing field, equalising speaking time and opportunities for debate between participants. Whether virtually or in person, these factors are largely influenced by how skilfully a meeting is chaired; again, councils often provide support and training to chairs to ensure they can chair meetings competently and fairly. Similarly, we are not aware of any evidence to suggest that it is more difficult to provide effective opposition or scrutiny in a remote format, rather the opposite with higher levels of public engagement and opportunities to meet virtually being easier to convene.
• There is no evidence to suggest that there is less opportunity for residents to speak or ask questions at virtual meetings as requests to speak are usually received in advance of a meeting for both physical and virtual meetings. Officers of the council then support the resident to address the relevant committee in the most appropriate manner.
• Current physical meetings arrangements do not disallow a councillor from continuing to serve on the council if they need to move out of the area permanently. Councillors must attend at least one meeting in person every six months under the current regime, which is achievable even if they are resident elsewhere. Disallowing councils from using virtual meetings for this reason would be disproportionate to the likelihood of and risks associated with councillors moving outside of the local area.

Question 6: What do you think are some of the main advantages of holding face-to-face meetings, as opposed to remote meetings?

The advantages and disadvantages of holding face-to-face meetings vary between different councils depending on their local circumstances, the needs of their community, and individual councillors' circumstances. For example, some councillors may prefer meeting in person because they do not have good internet connectivity; others may prefer to meet virtually because attending the physical location requires a long commute.

Only councils will be able to determine the most appropriate format for each of their meetings and balance the advantages and disadvantages of the different meeting formats in the context of their local circumstances.

Question 7: If permanent arrangements were to be made for local authorities in England, for which meetings do you think they should have the option to hold remote meetings?

• For all meetings
• For most meetings with a few exceptions (please specify)
• Only for some meetings (please specify)
• I think local authorities should be able to decide for themselves which meetings they should have the option to meet remotely
• I do not think local authorities should have the option to hold remote meetings for any meetings
• Unsure

Councils are best placed to decide when and how meetings should be convened to meet the needs of their local communities. This should include options for in person, virtual and hybrid meetings so that councils can balance the advantages and disadvantages of different meeting formats in the context of their local circumstances. Councils should be able to decide for themselves which meetings should have the option to meet remotely.

If the flexibility to hold online meetings is restored to councils it is essential that the government avoids being overly prescriptive about the kind of meetings that councils can conduct via virtual and hybrid formats. Councils and councillors are best placed to decide how and when to use different meetings formats to balance the advantages and disadvantages of different meeting options and reflect the variety of local authority types and governance arrangements. Councils will need considerable flexibility for local determination as to how and when to utilise virtual and hybrid meetings to ensure they can realise the benefits of different meeting options to suit their local context.

Question 8:  If permanent arrangements were to be made for local authorities in England, in which circumstances do you think local authorities should have the option to hold remote meetings?

• In any circumstances
• Only in extenuating circumstances where a meeting cannot be held face-to-face or some members would be unable to attend (e.g. severe weather events, coronavirus restrictions)
• I think local authorities should be able to decide for themselves which circumstances they should have the option to meet remotely
• I do not think local authorities should have the option to hold remote meetings under any circumstances
• Other (please specify)
• Unsure

Councils are best placed to decide when and how meetings should be convened to meet the needs of their local communities. This should include options for in person, virtual and hybrid meetings so that councils can balance the advantages and disadvantages of different meeting formats in the context of their local circumstances. Councils should be able to decide for themselves under which circumstances they should have the option to meet remotely.

If the flexibility to hold online meetings is restored to councils it is essential that the government avoids being overly prescriptive about the circumstances under which councils can use virtual and hybrid meeting formats. Councils and councillors are best placed to decide how and when to use different meetings formats to balance the advantages and disadvantages of different meeting options and reflect the variety of local authority types and governance arrangements. Councils will need considerable flexibility for local determination as to how and when to utilise virtual and hybrid meetings to ensure they can realise the benefits of different meeting options to suit their local context.

Question 9: Would you have concerns if local authorities in England were given the power to decide for themselves which meetings, and in what circumstances, they have the option to hold remote meetings?

• Yes
• No
• Unsure

No, the LGA does not have concerns about providing councils with this flexibility. The LGA supports councils having the power to decide for themselves which meetings and in what circumstances virtual and hybrid meetings can be held. Making decisions at a national level about the circumstances in which local authorities can meet virtually would lack the nuance necessary to account for the variety of local authority types, governance arrangements and circumstances in which councils meet.

When the Flexibility Regulations were announced, the local government sector worked quickly to produce guidance and materials to support councils to deliver virtual meetings within the context of the new regulations. Lawyers in Local Government and the Association of Democratic Services Officers developed a Remote meetings guidance document outlining the new provisions and a Remote meetings protocol and procedures document to support councils to apply virtual meeting principles to various council meetings. The Local Government Association also developed an online virtual and hybrid meeting hub which provided relevant guidance, information about different virtual meeting platforms and case studies in one easy to access location.

Since the 7 May, councils have had to meet in person again and the sector has again worked to develop relevant guidance for this new context. Lawyers in Local Government and the Association of Democratic Services Officers have produced Guidance a new document ‘Guidance on remote meetings: What next for local authorities?’ which covers the implications of the High Court judgement on virtual meeting provisions for councils in England. The LGA is also working to publish good practice case studies for councils conducting COVID-safe council meetings since 7 May.

 Many councils may choose to return to fully physical meetings, however, there is a clear argument for councils to be provided with the flexibility to decide if virtual or hybrid options may be appropriate for some of their meetings or in certain circumstances. If this power were given to councils, the sector would work together, as it has done throughout the pandemic, to provide the relevant guidance, information, and assistance to support councils to make these decision locally and to implement those decision.

Question 10: If yes, do you have any suggestions for how your concerns could be mitigated/overcome?

Not Applicable

Question 11: In your view, would making express provision for English local authorities to meet remotely particularly benefit or disadvantage any individuals with protected characteristics, e.g. those with disabilities or caring responsibilities?

As mentioned earlier in Question 5, only restricting councils to meeting exclusively in one format is a barrier to engaging with public meetings or standing for election. Restricting councils to only meeting in person has disadvantaged many protected groups from engaging with local democracy.

Councils have commented that virtual meetings have 'levelled the playing field' for working councillors, disabled councillors, and those with childcare or adult caring responsibilities over the past year. Virtual meeting options have removed a barrier to participation for residents who previously found attending meetings challenging.

The option to join a meeting virtually may allow a wider range of people to engage with meetings regularly, for example, joining a meeting without having to take time out of work or find childcare or other caring support. Virtual meeting options may be easier for people with mobility impairments where travel is expensive or inconvenient.

People with hearing or visual impairments may find virtual meetings more accessible than physical attendance if the software provides options for live transcription and is compatible with their assistive technologies.

Residents and councillors with fluctuating medical conditions may find the option to attend meetings virtually beneficial, helping them to attend meetings more regularly even when their condition has deteriorated. Even in cases where internet connectivity is poor, virtual attendance may still be preferable to not attending the meeting at all.

Virtual meetings can be made more accessible by ensuring good quality hardware and by observing good meeting etiquette. For example:

• Good quality microphones which cancel out background noise help auto transcribe software to produce accurate live captions. For important meetings, councils may wish to employ a professional typist to live caption the meeting.
• Screenreaders used by visually impaired attendees automatically read out chat content which can confuse the user; the chat function can be disabled during the meeting to avoid this issue. Instead, the Chair can bring in speakers one by one to ask or respond to questions as they would in a physical meeting.
• Councils are bound by the Public Sector Equality Duty and must work to advance equality by removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics, taking steps to meet the needs of people from protected groups where these are different from the needs of other people and encouraging people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately low. Providing councils with the option to offer virtual meeting formats may help them fulfil this duty and advance equality of access to democratic processes.