Agenda Item 3
STANDARDS COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Standards Committee held on 10 January 2012
in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 2.00 pm.
Members present:
District
Councillors:
Mr P W Moore
Ms B Palmer
Mr J Savory
Mrs H Thompson
Independent
Members:
Mr G Allen
Mr A Bullen
Mrs M Evans
Mr H Gupta
Mr S Sankar (Chairman)
Parish Members:
Mr M Coates
Mr A Nash
Officers in
Attendance:
The Monitoring Officer
The Democratic Services Officer (ED)
20.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Mr R Barr and Mrs A Shirley
21.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received
.
22.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the Meeting of the Standards Committee held on 06
September 2011 were approved as a correct record.
23.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
There were no items of urgent business.
24.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None
`
Standards Committee
1
10 January 2012
25.
PARISH AND DISTRICT MEMBERS’ REGISTER OF INTERESTS AND
OFFICER REGISTER OF GIFTS AND HOSPITALITY
The Registers were open to display and were available for inspection in the
Legal Services area.
26.
DISPENSATIONS REQUEST – ROUGHTON PARISH COUNCIL
Roughton Parish Council had requested that dispensations were granted to
allow its members to consider making a payment of approximately £250 to
the Crazee Kids Youth Club towards the cost of hiring the village hall as a
meeting place. A number of parish councillors also served on the Youth Club
committee and without a dispensation they would be unable to vote on the
matter as they would have a personal and prejudicial interest in that item of
business. Consequently, the Parish Council would be unable to progress this
item of business because they would be inquorate.
Members discussed the request:
a) Clarification was sought on the extent of the Committee’s influence over
the dispensation, if granted. The Monitoring Officer said that the
Committee could not limit the level of payment considered by the Parish
Council. The decision related purely to the granting of a dispensation.
b) Advice was sought as to whether to limit the dispensation request to this
one decision or whether to grant an open request. The Monitoring Officer
said that as the request had been for one occasion only then it may be
best to limit it. This could be reviewed if subsequent requests were
received.
c) It had been noted that one of the parish councillors requesting a
dispensation was also the subject of a complaint. The Monitoring Officer
advised that this had no bearing on the granting of the dispensation.
RESOLVED
to grant dispensations to Councillors Mr R Seward, Mrs C Bennett and Mr P
Bennett.
27.
DISPENSATIONS REQUEST – SWANTON NOVERS PARISH COUNCIL
Swanton Novers Parish Council had requested that dispensations were
granted to allow its members to consider making a donation of £300 to the
Village Hall Committee towards new play equipment. A number of parish
councillors also served on the Village Hall Committee and without a
dispensation they would be unable to vote on the matter as they would have a
personal and prejudicial interest in that item of business. Consequently, the
Parish Council would be unable to progress this item of business because
they would be inquorate.
RESOLVED
To grant dispensations to Councillors Mrs V Hart, Mrs R Leeder, Mrs C
Armstrong, Mrs V Brittain and Mr R Hart.
Standards Committee
2
10 January 2012
28.
LOCALISM ACT 2011 – PREDETERMINATION AND STANDARDS
The Localism Act 2011 came into effect on 15 November 2011. The
Monitoring Officer informed the Committee that the regulations and
associated guidance were not yet available. This meant that if the abolition of
Standards for England went ahead at the end of January 2012 as proposed,
there would be no more access to guidance and advice on the existing
provisions.
The Act would now be implemented after April 2012. An extension had been
granted to Independent Members to continue in their role until the regime was
formally terminated. Once the new regime was in place there would no longer
be a role for independent members on the Standards Committee. Instead one
or more Independent ‘persons’ would be appointed. They would be invited to
attend meetings of the Standards Committee but were unlikely to be co-opted
onto the Committee.
A new Code of Conduct needed to be put in place. The Monitoring Officer
said that he intended to consult with NALC and other Monitoring Officers
across the region as to whether a county-wide Code could be adopted.
The Localism Act abolished the concepts of personal and prejudicial interests.
Instead regulations would define ‘Disclosable Pecuniary Interests’ (DPIs). The
Monitoring Officer would be required to maintain a register of interests which
must be available for inspection on the Council’s website. This meant that
there would be less scope for error to occur during a meeting.
Members discussed the update:
a) It was hoped that restorative approaches would be included in the new
regime. Broadland District Council was leading on this initiative and
intended to consult with Monitoring Officers across the region on
introducing an over-arching Code of Conduct that would include
restorative approaches. The Monitoring Officer acknowledged that this
was a good initiative but added that local authorities would have a limited
range of sanctions that they could apply.
b) The meaning of ‘independent person’ was queried. It was not clear
whether current independent members of the Committee would be
excluded from applying. The Monitoring Officer said that the limited
information available implied that existing independent members were
precluded from applying for the position. However, it was not clear
whether they could apply for the position at other local authorities in the
region. In response to a further question as to whether the independent
person would not be a voting member of the Standards Committee, the
Monitoring Officer said that this was correct but that they must be
consulted before any key decisions were made.
c) A Member asked whether the appointed Independent Person(s) could
receive payment for attending. The Monitoring Officer said that this was
not yet clear but that it was likely to be up to the Council to decide.
d) The future remit of the Standards Committee was raised. The Monitoring
Officer said that the Committee would only be able to make
recommendations and these would not have to be acted on. There would
also be more delegation to the Monitoring Officer which could impact on
the guidance given to potential complainants.
Standards Committee
3
10 January 2012
e) It was highlighted that the members of a new Standards Committee would
need to receive full training to ensure they were aware of their
responsibilities. There was also a concern that if more decisions were
delegated to the Monitoring Officer, the input of Members would diminish.
f) Clarification was sought as to why independent members would no longer
be allowed to sit on the Standards Committee. It was felt that they had
made a positive contribution to the existing committee. The Monitoring
Officer said that no explanation had been given. It was unlikely to be due
to recruitment issues and costs were relatively low.
29.
CORRESPONDENCE FROM A FORMER PARISH COUNCILLOR
A letter had been received from a former Parish Councillor who wished to
appeal against the decision of the Standards Committee Hearing held on 21
October 2011. The Monitoring Officer advised that any appeals should be
made to the First Tier Tribunal within 28 days. The request was therefore out
of time and there was no right to appeal to the Standards Committee.
AGREED
That the Monitoring Officer should write to the correspondent advising him of
the procedure.
30.
LOCAL ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK CASES
The Monitoring Officer updated the Committee on the status of complaints
received. Several of the complaints related to the same Parish Council and it
was hoped that training would be scheduled as soon as possible to resolve
some of the issues. Two reports had recently been completed by the external
investigator and they would come to the next Committee on the 7 February
2012 for consideration.
The meeting concluded at 14.45 pm
___________
Chairman
Standards Committee
4
10 January 2012