Please Contact: Emma Denny
Please email: emma.denny@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Please Direct Dial on: 01263 516010
01 September 2014
A meeting of the Standards Committee of North Norfolk District Council will be held in the
Council Chamber at the Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on Tuesday 09 September
2014 at 2.00 p.m.
Members of the public who wish to ask a question or speak on an agenda item are
requested to arrive at least 15 minutes before the start of the meeting. It will not always be
possible to accommodate requests after that time. This is to allow time for the Committee
Chair to rearrange the order of items on the agenda for the convenience of members of the
public. Further information on the procedure for public speaking can be obtained from
Democratic Services, Tel: 01263 516047, Email: democraticservices@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Anyone attending this meeting may take photographs, film or audio-record the proceedings
and report on the meeting. Anyone wishing to do so must inform the Chairman. If you are a
member of the public and you wish to speak on an item on the agenda, please be aware that
you may be filmed or photographed.
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To District Members: Mrs H Cox, Mr B J Hannah, Mr P W Moore, Ms B Palmer, Mr J
Savory, Mr R Stevens, and Mr P Williams
Co-opted Members: Mr G Allen, Mr R Barr, Mr A Bullen, Mrs M Evans, Mr H Gupta, Mr A
Nash, Mrs A Shirley
Members of the Management Team, appropriate Officers, Press and Public.
If you have any special requirements in order
to attend this meeting, please let us know in advance
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative
format or in a different language please contact us
Chief Executive: Sheila Oxtoby, Corporate Directors: Nick Baker & Steve Blatch
Tel 01263 513811 Fax 01263 515042 Minicom 01263 516005
Email districtcouncil@north-norfolk.gov.uk Web site northnorfolk.org
AGENDA
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
3.
MINUTES
(attached – p. 1)
To approve as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on
05 August 2014.
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any items of business which the Chairman decides should be
considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local
Government Act 1972.
5.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any
of the following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires
that declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a pecuniary
interest.
6.
PARISH AND DISTRICT MEMBERS’ REGISTER OF INTERESTS AND OFFICER
REGISTER OF GIFTS AND HOSPITALITY
Members are reminded that the Parish and District Members’ Register of Interests
and Officer Register of Gifts and Hospitality are available for inspection in the
Democratic Services section.
7.
PARISH COUNCILS AND STANDARDS: MOVING FORWARD
To discuss the opportunities for closer working with the Planning Service to further
engage with Parish and Town Councils. The Head of Planning will be in attendance
for this item.
8.
STANDARDS AND TIMESCALES
(page 6) (Appendix A – p.11)
Please note this item was presented to the Committee at the meeting on 5th
August 2014. It is coming back for further consideration at the Committee’s
request.
Summary:
At the request of the Chief Executive, the Monitoring Officer
has prepared a report regarding the process and timescales
for dealing with complaints.
This reports sets out the process and timescales for the
Monitoring Officer dealing with Standards complaints
following the changes of the regime.
Conclusions:
The Council’s “Arrangements” under the Localism Act 2011
are its protocols and procedures for receipt and
determination of Standards and Ethics complaints. The
Arrangements serve this purpose both for complaints
against District Councillors and against Parish Councillors
of
parish
councils
within
the
District.
The Arrangements have now been in place since mid-2012
and members may wish both to review their operation and
consider whether some further detail might usefully be
added in terms of procedures and timescales. I therefore
set out below some suggestions based upon our
experience to date of the operation of these arrangements.
Recommendation:
9.
1.
To consider changes to the complaints form
2.
To consider changes to the Criteria for the receipt
and assessment of complaints that is set out on
page 97 of the constitution, as detailed in the below
report.
MONITORING OFFICER’S ANNUAL REPORT 2013/14
Please note that this item is to follow
To receive the Monitoring Officer Annual Report 2013 – 2014
(Source: David Johnson, Monitoring Officer, 01603 222313)
david.johnson@norfolk.gov.uk
10.
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
To pass the following resolution:
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public
be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that
they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1
and 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act”
11.
STANDARDS AND CONDUCT CASES
To receive an oral update from the Monitoring Officer regarding Standards
complaints and general themes therein.
Agenda Item 3
STANDARDS COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Standards Committee held on 5 August 2014 in
the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 2.00pm.
Members present:
1.
District
Councillors:
Mr B Hannah
Mr P Moore
Miss B Palmer
Mr R Stevens
Mrs H Cox (Chairman)
Mr P Williams
Co-opted
Members:
Mr G Allen
Mr R Barr
Mr A Bullen
Mr H Gupta
Mrs M Evans
Mr A Nash
Officers in
Attendance:
The Independent Person
The Democratic Services Team Leader
The Democratic Services Officer (TGS)
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
None received
2.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None
3.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the Meeting of the Standards Committee held on 10 June
2014 were approved as a correct record of the meeting and signed by the
Chairman.
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None
5.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None
Standards Committee
1
05 August 2014
6.
PARISH AND DISTRICT MEMBERS’ REGISTER OF INTERESTS AND
OFFICER REGISTER OF GIFTS AND HOSPITALITY
The Chairman informed the Committee that the Registers were open to display
and were available for inspection in the Legal Services area.
7.
PARISH COUNCILS AND STANDARDS: MOVING FORWARD.
The Democratic Services Officer introduced this item. She explained that the
individual events which had run over the last two months had gone
successfully, and that there were a number coming up in September who had
also requested individual engagement sessions. Mr R Stevens queried if it was
just those who had requested individual sessions that members and officers
were attending. The Democratic Services Officer replied that yes, they would
only be in attendance if the parish had requested it.
The Chairman also provided a brief update on the events. She thanked Mr H
Gupta for his attendance at two of the events and hoped that in the future other
members and co-opted members would also be in attendance. She thanked
the Democratic Services Officer for her work as they had successfully engaged
with approximately 53 parish councils so far. She concluded that in her view,
she wanted to maintain the engagement events to keep standards high. Mr A
Bullen queried if there was a common theme which had been pulled out of the
meetings and the Chairman replied that yes there was and she would talk
about this later.
Mr H Gupta discussed his attendance and explained that he saw it as an
opportunity to be proactive and prevent issues within parish councils. He
explained the events covered the salient issues and interaction with the
parishes had been beneficial. The Chairman explained that there were four
more dates upcoming for standards events, and the Democratic Services
Officer would circulate these.
The Chairman then discussed the general theme which had become apparent
during the individual events, and suggested for many in parish councils the light
touch regime was becoming a frustration, particularly due to the lack of
sanctions. She explained that it may be useful for the committee to think about
this, particularly as there was an upcoming government consultation regarding
the new regime.
She then went on to discuss issues around planning which had been raised at
a number of the events, and commented that she would have a discussion with
Democratic Services around introducing planning engagement into standards
events. The Democratic Services Team Leader commented that the Head of
Planning had acknowledged this and would be attending the following meeting
to allow members to have a discussion around planning issues and
understanding. Mr T Nash also discussed a meeting he had attended with the
Chief Executive and representatives of NALC, in which there was discussion
around training and development events for parish councils on planning issues.
The committee went on to discuss other issues with regards to planning, and
parish council understanding. Mr G Allen commented that it was imperative that
parish councils understood that they were a consultee and not the decision
Standards Committee
2
05 August 2014
making body, and also that officers could only advise on a decision, and not
make the decisions which were left to councillors. Mr P Moore agreed and
commented in parishes there were always strong views which had to be
balanced by district councillors, but that parish councils should be aware that
they were a material consideration. He also commented that he would be
happy to attend any such event involving standards and planning. Mr H Gupta
commented that it was important that parish councils had the decision making
process for planning decisions explained to them and that they were
communicated with effectively.
The Independent Person commented that he had seen the frustration of
parishes at their perceived level of impotence, and particularly since the
Localism Act there had been an expectation of change and more power at a
local level, which had not come through. He explained that officers often
considered what the planning inspectorate would say, and that planning policy
was key to allowing councillors significant power and flexibility in their decision
making.
The Chairman thanked members for all their comments and commented that
Democratic Services seemed to have the issue in hand. The Democratic
Services Team Leader commented that it would be possible to investigate
broader sessions involving planning and standards further down the line, but
that these events may need to be put on hold until following the restructure in
the planning department. Mr P Moore commented that there needed to be
further liaison between the district and parishes with regards to parish plans, in
order to fully explain to parishes that these would be considered a material
consideration.
8.
STANDARDS AND TIMESCALES
The Democratic Services Team Leader introduced this item in the Monitoring
Officers’ absence. She explained that this report had come about following a
request for timescales to be applied to the complaints procedure, which were
included within the report. She explained that the timescales would be more
helpful for complainants to provide them with guidance at the time of making a
complaint. She then outlined where they could build in these timelines, and
also explained that where a case went forward for investigation it would not be
possible to apply timescales, but the complainant would be kept informed of
progress of the investigation. She also explained that where forms were
emailed in, complainants would now receive acknowledgement of receipt. The
report requested for the committee to agree to these changes which could then
be input into the form and the website.
Mr P Moore commented that it was not possible to deal with this item when the
Monitoring Officer was not in attendance and requested for this item to be
deferred until his return as he had a number of questions regarding the purple
papers. The Chairman explained that the current item was just the timescales
report which contained no exempt information, but it was proposed to have the
timescales approved in order to allow changes to the constitution around the
criteria for the receipt and assessment of complaints.
Mr P Williams commented that it was important for complainants to
of their complaint back to them along with acknowledgement
particularly if these complaints were sent by post and written by
Independent Person commented on some of the issues raised in
Standards Committee
3
get a copy
of receipt,
hand. The
the report,
05 August 2014
and suggested those involved should be immediately informed once a
complaint is raised. Mr P Moore queried if complainants were kept anonymous,
and the Democratic Services Team Leader replied that no, they were informed
who made the complaint. Mr T Nash also expanded on this, explaining that the
complaints form included a section for complainants who wished to remain
anonymous. The Independent Person explained this was ultimately at the
Monitoring Officer’s discretion.
Mrs M Evans requested that there be included within the changes a clear
statement regarding the acknowledgement of complaints and a user friendly
flow chart which showed the progression of the complaint. Democratic Services
agreed that this could be included.
Mr A Bullen queried if other members for example, in a parish council, were
made aware if a complaint was made about one of their members. The
Democratic Services Team Leader replied that whilst they wouldn’t be
automatically informed, if there were significant governance issues raised in the
complaint then David could informally talk to the committee.
The Chairman asked members of the committee if they were happy to progress
and approve changes to the complaints form and to complaints guidance.
Members commented that they believed this item needed more discussion and
that it may be useful to have this discussion once the Monitoring Officer was
available. Mrs M Evans commented that officers should take into account
suggestions made during the meeting, including acknowledgement of
complaint and a flow chart for complainants, which could then be incorporated
for discussion at the following meeting.
The Democratic Services Team Leader asked if it would still be appropriate to
make changes to the complaints form and to the complaints guidance. Mr P
Williams commented that he still needed clarification and other members
agreed. The Democratic Services Team Leader commented that she would
hold off on any changes.
The Independent Person noted his concern around the complaints guidance
which stated that the Monitoring Officer ‘may’ contact the Independent Person
rather than that he had to. Members agreed that there seemed to be an issue
with regards to the entire process and asked for a review of the process.
The Democratic Services team agreed that they would notify the Monitoring
Officer of the requested changes and inclusions for his report and would
discuss options for a review process to be considered at the following meeting.
9.
EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC
The Committee passed the following resolution:
‘That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and
public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the
grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined
in paragraphs 1 and 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act’
10.
STANDARDS AND CONDUCT CASES
Standards Committee
4
05 August 2014
Members considered current standards cases and the general themes
prevalent within them.
11.
STANDARDS COMPLAINTS
The Monitoring Officer reported on the complaints received, the type of
breaches alleged and the status of matters.
The meeting concluded at 15.45 pm
__________________
Chairman
Standards Committee
5
05 August 2014
Agenda Item No_____8_______
Standards and Timescales
Summary:
At the request of the Chief Executive, the Monitoring
Officer has prepared a report regarding the process and
timescales for dealing with complaints.
This reports sets out the process and timescales for the
Monitoring Officer dealing with Standards complaints
following the changes of the regime.
Conclusions:
The Council’s “Arrangements” under the Localism Act
2011 are its protocols and procedures for receipt and
determination of Standards and Ethics complaints. The
Arrangements serve this purpose both for complaints
against District Councillors and against Parish
Councillors of parish councils within the District.
The Arrangements have now been in place since mid2012 and members may wish both to review their
operation and consider whether some further detail
might usefully be added in terms of procedures and
timescales. I therefore set out below some suggestions
based upon our experience to date of the operation of
these arrangements.
Recommendations:
1.
To consider changes to the complaints form
2.
To consider changes to the Criteria for the
receipt and assessment of complaints that is
set out on page 97 of the constitution, as
detailed in the below report.
LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW
(Papers relied on to write the report, which do not contain exempt information and which are not
published elsewhere)
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
David Johnson Monitoring Officer, 01603 22313, david.johnson@norfolk.gov.uk
6
1.
Introduction
Standards Arrangements
1.1
The Council’s “Arrangements” under the Localism Act 2011 are its protocols
and procedures for receipt and determination of Standards and Ethics
complaints. The Arrangements serve this purpose both for complaints
against District Councillors and against Parish Councillors of parish councils
within the District.
1.2
The Arrangements have now been in place since mid 2012 and members
may wish both to review their operation and consider whether some further
detail might usefully be added in terms of procedures and timescales. I
therefore set out below some suggestions based upon our experience to date
of the operation of these arrangements.
2.
Receipt of Complaints
2.1
The first part of the system is the provision for receiving complaints.
Complainants are directed to the Council’s website on which there is a
standard form for completion. The form is useful in that it directs the
complainant’s attention to identifying precisely the Councillor, the particular
Council, the behaviour about which the complaint is made and the date on
which it happened.
2.2
A sample form is attached. The form appears to have worked well in practice
and enables key information to be identified for assessment purposes. I
would nevertheless welcome any views of members on the use of the form.
In view of the experience of the cases set out in my other report to today’s
Committee I would ask members to consider the following:(a)
I believe it would it be useful to include on the form two warnings
along the following lines:
“Please note that the Code of Conduct only applies to
members and co-opted members when they are acting in their
capacity as Councillors. If you complaint relates to conduct of
a Councillor in his or her private or personal capacity then it is
outside these arrangements. Please consider carefully and if
you are in any doubt please contact the Monitoring Officer on
01603 223247 to discuss.”
“These Standards Arrangements are put in place to regulate
the individual conduct of Councillors. If it appears that your
complaint more properly concerns the Council as a whole
(whether it is North Norfolk District Council or one of the Parish
Councils within its area) then you should take the matter up
with that Council by writing in the case of North Norfolk District
Council for the attention of the Chief Executive Officer and in
the case of a Parish Council a letter addressed to its Clerk, or
if it does not have a Clerk, to its Chairman.”
7
3.
Assessment
3.1
The complaint once received is sent, for information only, to the Subject
Member. It is important to emphasise that the Subject Member must not make
any response or any representations at this stage. There is no requirement
for any action on the part of the Subject member until assessment is
completed.
The complaint is then assessed by the Monitoring Officer in accordance with
adopted criteria. During this phase of the process the Monitoring Officer has
considerable flexibility in deciding how a complaint may best be tackled. It
may be that a discussion with the complainant and with the subject member
might achieve some resolution of the matter. Otherwise, the seriousness of
the complaint is gauged by reference to the adopted criteria (attached). The
outcome could be either:


“other action” such as that described above
no further action required
refer for investigation.
This assessment stage should not usually involve any further information
gathering or investigation and in terms of a timescale would suggest that 21
days from receipt of the complaint would enable the Monitoring Officer to read
the complaint and any supporting documentation, consider the issues,
research any previous reported cases and other useful information and draft
and send out an assessment notice.
Each case will depend very much on its own circumstances and some cases
will be able to be assessed well within this timescale. If the matter involves
difficulties or the Monitoring Officer decides to seek the views of the
Independent Person in relation to the assessment then the matter may
exceed the 21 days. In such a case the Monitoring Officer will write to the
complainant and the subject member informing them of this and setting out a
revised timescale.
3.2
If the decision is “other action” or “no further action” then the formal part of the
process ceases at that point and in the case of “no further action” the matter
is recorded as closed. This is then reported to the next following meeting of
the Standards Committee. In the meantime I would send a copy of the
assessment to the Subject Member and to the Head of Democratic Services
of NNDC or to the Parish Clerk of the Subject Member’s council.
If the decision is for “other action” then the timescale will very much depend
upon what that action is. In this case I would keep the Chairman informed of
events and if a resolution is reached report that to the next meeting of
Standards Committee.
If the decision is that the matter is referred in whole or in part for investigation
then the next step is to appoint an investigator. This can be any person as
long as they are suitably skilled and available to conduct an investigation into
the particular case. My first recourse is to the Council’s Head of Legal
Services to ascertain whether she is able to provide an investigator from the
Council’s in-house Legal Team. If for some reason it would not be
appropriate for the investigator to be appointed in this way the likely next step
8
would be to identify an investigator (possibly a Solicitor but not necessarily
so) from another Local Authority. Local Authorities in Norfolk and Suffolk
have developed networks for supplying resources to each other in this way
and it will not usually be a problem to find a suitable investigator.
3.3
In terms of timescale I would suggest that appointing an investigator should
normally take no more than 14 days. I will write to the Subject Member and
the Complainant and the Parish Clerk confirming the details of the
investigator.
I would write formally with a copy of the assessment to the Subject Member
and to the Head of Democratic Services of NNDC or to the Parish Clerk of the
Subject Member’s council.
3.4
3.5
Once an investigator is appointed that person will usually prepare an
investigation plan and timetable. This could be along the following lines:(a)
Consider complaint and supporting documentation as submitted;
(b)
Contact the complainant and, if appropriate, arrange to take a
statement;
(c)
Contact subject member and arrange for interview and statement;
(d)
Interview other persons as appropriate;
(e)
If the complaint concerns a Parish Councillor contact the Parish Clerk
to inform them of the investigation and if necessary to involve the
Clerk in making interview arrangements;
(f)
Acquire the relevant Code of Conduct for the Subject Member’s
Council.
The time that each of the above steps will take is very much dependent upon
the seriousness of the case, the availability of members and many other
factors. As an investigator I always offer the subject member and any other
interviewee the opportunity to have someone present with them at the
interview as I believe this to be good practice. Again, this adds to the issue of
availability if another party has to be added to the diary check.
We could consider that for investigations the investigator is instructed to
report back to the Monitoring Officer after six weeks to submit a final report or
to submit an update to the Monitoring Officer and to Standards Committee
Chairman as to the progress of the investigation.
At the point that the investigation report is submitted to the Monitoring Officer,
the Monitoring Officer must at that stage refer the report and its conclusions to
the Independent Person. This is a statutory requirement of the Localism Act
2011. Depending upon the complexity of the case it would be reasonable to
ask the IP for his view within 14 days – or to notify the MO if that timescale
will be extended.
If the report’s conclusion is that there has been a breach of a Code then the
matter will be placed upon the agenda for the next Standards Committee.
9
If the matter is relatively straightforward then it could be dealt with at that next
meeting. If the hearing requires attendance of witnesses and others then it will
likely need to be deferred to the next scheduled meeting or to a special
meeting with only that item on the agenda.
Depending on how soon this falls after the report is received by the Monitoring
Officer it may be that a hearing will have to be deferred to the next following
Standards Committee in order for the parties to arrange availability and for a
report to be drafted by the Monitoring Officer introducing the case and
explaining how the matter is then to proceed.
Once a hearing has taken place then the next step will depend upon whether
it is a District Council case or a Parish Council case.
In the case of a District Council case members will have usually made their
findings and in the case of a finding of breach of the Code, will have
considered and imposed a sanction upon the subject member. It will remain
thereafter only for the subject member to be formally notified of the decision
and for any subsequent action to be noted.
If the Standards Committee finds that there has been no breach of the Code
the matter is at an end.
If it is a Parish Council case and the Standards Committee makes a finding of
breach of the Code then the report together with findings and a
recommendation as to sanction is referred to the Parish Council. The
Monitoring Officer will write to the Clerk to the Parish Council asking for the
matter to be placed upon the next available agenda for Parish Council
members to consider the Standards Committee’s recommendation. The
decision of the Parish Council will be reported back to the next available
Standards Committee for information. The matter is then at an end.
4.
Conclusion
4.1
Members should consider the above information and consider how they wish
to proceed.
10
MEMBERS’ CODE
OF CONDUCT
COMPLAINT FORM
Your details
1. Please provide us with your name and contact details
Title:
First name:
Last name:
Address:
Daytime telephone:
Evening telephone:
Mobile telephone:
Email address:
We will tell the following people that you have made this complaint:



the member(s) you are complaining about
the monitoring officer of the authority
the parish or town clerk (if applicable)
______________________________________________________________
If you need this document in large print, audio
Braille, alternative format or in a different language,
please contact our Customer Services Team,
Telephone 01263 513811
11
We will tell them your name and give them a summary of your
complaint. We will give them full details of your complaint where
necessary or appropriate to be able to deal with it. If you have serious
concerns about your name and a summary, or details of your complaint
being released, please complete section 6 of this form.
2. Please tell us which complainant type best describes you:
Member of the public
An elected or co-opted member of an authority
An independent member of the standards committee
Member of Parliament
Local authority monitoring officer
Other council officer or authority employee
Other (
)
3. Equality monitoring
The Race Relations Act 2000 requires us to monitor ethnic or national
origin to ensure that we do not inadvertently discriminate against members
of a particular group. It would, therefore, be helpful if you would complete
the ethnic monitoring section of the form, although this is not compulsory.
The answers will be removed and kept entirely separate from your
complaint and will be completely confidential. They will be used for
statistical purposes only, in which individuals will not be identified.
your ethnic origin
Asian or Asian British
Chinese
White
Black or Black British
Mixed
Other
Making your complaint
4. Please provide us with the name of the member(s) you believe have
breached the Code of Conduct and the name of their Council:
Title
First name
Last name
12
Council name
5. Please explain in this section (or on separate sheets) what the member
has done that you believe breaches the Code of Conduct. If you are
complaining about more than one member you should clearly explain
what each individual person has done that you believe breaches the
Code of Conduct.
It is important that you provide all the information you wish to have
taken into account by the Standards Committee when it decides
whether to take any action on your complaint. For example:

You should be specific, wherever possible, about exactly what
you are alleging the member said or did. For instance, instead of
writing that the member insulted you, you should state what it
was they said.

You should provide the dates of the alleged incidents wherever
possible. If you cannot provide exact dates it is important to give
a general timeframe.

You should confirm whether there are any witnesses to the
alleged conduct and provide their names and contact details if
possible.

You should provide any relevant background information.
Please provide us with the details of your complaint. Continue on a
separate sheet if there is not enough space on this form.
13
Only complete this next section if you are requesting that your
identity is kept confidential
6. In the interests of fairness and natural justice, we believe members
who are complained about have a right to know who has made the
complaint. We also believe they have a right to be provided with a
summary of the complaint.
Please note that requests for confidentiality or requests for suppression
of complaint details will not automatically be granted. The assessment
sub-committee will consider the request alongside the substance of
your complaint. We will then contact you with the decision. If your
request for confidentiality is not granted, we will usually allow you the
option of withdrawing your complaint.
However, it is important to understand that in certain exceptional
circumstances where the matter complained about is very serious, we
can proceed with an investigation or other action and disclose your
name even if you have expressly asked us not to.
Please provide us with details of why you believe we should withhold
your name and/or the details of your complaint:
Additional Help
7. You can make your complaint in the following ways;

In writing to the Monitoring Officer, North Norfolk District Council,
Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer.
14

Electronically to david.johnson@norfolk.gov.uk
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative format
or in a different language please contact us.
Further information to help you complete this form can be found on the
accompanying guidance notes.
15