Meeting documents

Standards Committee
Monday, 13th March, 2006 7.30 pm

Date:
Monday, 13th March, 2006
Time:
7.30 p.m.
Place:
Front Committee Room at the Town Hall, Reigate
 

Attendance Details

Present:
Councillors Mrs. J.S. Bray, S.A. Kulka, J.H. Prevett and Mrs. R.S. Turner.

Mrs. J.A Cook - Salfords and Sidlow Parish Council
Dr. A.P. Kent - Horley Town Council

Mr. J. Broadbent - Independent Member (Chairman)
Mrs. J. Paul - Independent Member (Vice-Chairman)

Min NoDescriptionResolution
Part I
12 MINUTES
RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 26th September 2006 be approved as a correct record and signed.
13 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
None.
14 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
15 REVIEW OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT AND THE NEW ETHICAL FRAMEWORK
RESOLVED that the report be noted.
16 LOCAL GOVERNMENT OMBUDSMAN'S FORMAL REPORT 04/A/01941
RESOLVED that the Ombudsman's report and the Council's response be noted.

17 SOUTH EAST INDEPENDENT MEMBERS' NETWORK
RESOLVED that Mrs. Paul's continued involvement with the Network on behalf of the Committee be welcomed and endorsed.

18 STANDARDS BOARD FOR ENGLAND BULLETIN NO.27
RESOLVED that the Bulletin be received and noted.
19 ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
None.
The meeting closed at 8.02 p.m.

Minute

Min NoMinute
15The Committee received a comprehensive report on the Government's response to the Standards Board for England's recommendations for a review of the Code of Conduct for Members and to the Graham Committee on Standards of Conduct on Public Life proposals for a review of the New Ethical Framework.
The report indicated that the changes to the New Ethical Framework would require an Act of Parliament but the Government intended to include the changes in the next Local Government Bill. They would include:
· All standards complaints against Councillors would be made to the Monitoring Officer, rather than to the Standards Board
· Local authorities would refer up to the Standards Board complaints which they felt unable to investigate or which their Standards Committee would not be able to determine, for example because they related to allegations of very serious misconduct
· The Standards Board would concentrate on monitoring and improving the effectiveness of the system and investigating only the most serious allegations
· It would be mandatory that the Chairman of Standards Committees and Sub-Committees should be co-opted independent members
· The parallel Code of Conduct for Officers should be introduced
· Politically restricted posts will be retained
The main proposed changes to the Code of Conduct for Members, which could be effected by secondary legislation and might therefore be introduced earlier, were as follows:
· The General Principles should form a preamble to the Code of Conduct
· The requirement for members to report other members to the Standards Board should be deleted
· A new "offence" of bullying should be added to the Code of Conduct
· The Code of Conduct should contain an exception for disclosure of confidential information where such disclosure was in the public interest
· Outside official duties, only unlawful conduct should be regarded as likely to bring the Member's office of authority into disrepute
· The "offence" of misuse of public resources should be limited to serious misuse, and the Code of Conduct should define "inappropriate political purposes."
· The range of interests which require to be registered should be reduced
· The Code should redefine "friend" as "close personal associate"
· Interests arising from membership of another public body, a charity or local pressure group, should not prevent members from discharging their representative role
· Standards Committees should have wider discretion to grant dispensations
· The current £25 threshold for declaration of gifts and hospitality should be retained and the register of gifts and hospitality should be made public
The proposals to deal with a majority of complaints against Councillors at a local level could have significant cost and resource implications for the Council. Whilst the level of complaints involving Members of the Borough and Parish Councils had been very low, to date, future activity in this area could not be predicted with any certainty. Investigations at a local level could be very costly especially if outside independent assistance was required. It would not, for example, be possible for the Monitoring Officer to play a dual role of offering guidance and advice and then investigating allegations of misconduct.
Aside from concerns over resource implications, the proposals on the Code of Conduct and New Ethical Framework were, in the main, supported. The further localisation of the system would see the role of the Monitoring Officer and the Standards Committee greatly enhanced. The Standards Board for England would become more strategic in providing guidance and support. The proposals to simplify the Code of Conduct to make it easier to understand and operate at a local level was particularly welcome.
16The Committee's Terms of Reference included Ombudsman's investigations resulting in formal findings of maladministration. The Ombudsman had recently issued the above report with a finding of maladministration against the Council.

The Ombudsman's report was accordingly submitted together with a covering report that had been considered by the Executive on 17th November, 2005. The Executive had adopted the recommendations set out in the report.

The Committee noted that the Council had acknowledged the shortcomings in this case and prior to the Ombudsman's report had put in place procedures to prevent a repetition.
17Mrs. J. Paul (Independent Member and Vice-Chairman) reported on her past attendance at this Network.