Please Contact: Emma Denny
Please email: emma.denny@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Please Direct Dial on: 01263 516010
8 April 2013
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 16 April 2013 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
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To District Members: Mr B J Hannah, Mr P W Moore, Ms B Palmer, Mr J Savory, Mr R
Stevens, Mrs H Thompson and Mr P Williams
Co-opted Members: Mr G Allen, Mr R Barr, Mr A Bullen, Mr M Coates, 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
17 December 2012.
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
The Parish and District Members’ Register of Interests and Officer Register of Gifts
and Hospitality are available for inspection in the Legal Section.
7.
PARISH COUNCILS AND STANDARDS
(attached – p. 6)
Summary:
To update members on Parish Council development and
support
Conclusions:
That there are advantages to meeting parish councils to
discuss standards issues
Recommendations: Members to consider the report and instruct the Interim
Monitoring Officer as to engagement with parish
councils.
8.
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”
9.
STANDARDS COMPLAINTS
(attached – p. 8)
(Appendix A – p.10) (Appendix B – p.13)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION – Information contained in the report is exempt under
Regulation 8(6) of the Standards Committee (England) Regulations 2008
Summary:
Recommendations:
Cabinet member(s):
Wards Affected:
This report advises Members of complaints
received by the Monitoring Officer, the type
of breaches alleged and the status of the
matters. Additional information is provided to
update Members on recent cases.
Members are asked to note the contents of
the report.
All
All
Agenda Item 3
STANDARDS COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Standards Committee held on 17 December
2012 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 2.00
pm.
Members present:
District
Councillors:
Mr B Hannah
Mr P W Moore (Chairman)
Mr N Smith
Mr P Williams
Co-opted
Members:
Mr G Allen
Mr A Bullen
Mr M Coates
Mr H Gupta
Mr A Nash
Substitutes:
Mr N Smith for Ms B Palmer
Officers in
Attendance:
The Monitoring Officer
The Investigating Officer
The Democratic Services Officer (ED)
Also in
attendance:
The Independent Person
The Complainant and one of the Subject Members
(Subject Member A)
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Mr R Barr, Mrs M Evans, Mrs H Thompson, Ms
B Palmer, Mr J Savory and Mrs A Shirley
2.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received
.
3.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the Meeting of the Standards Committee held on 13
November 2012 were approved as a correct record.
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
There were no items of urgent business.
Standards Committee
1
17 December 2012
5.
6.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Member(s)
Minute
No.
Item
Interest
Mr A Nash
8
Complaint Reference 160
Personal and nonpecuniary – had
previously advised the
parish council on
earlier complaints
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.
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
On the advice of the Monitoring Officer, the Committee agreed 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’
8.
COMPLAINT REFERENCE 160
The Monitoring Officer explained to the Committee that a new set of papers
had been issued as the original set had not included all the appendices and
some of the appendices had been published in the wrong order. She checked
that all those present had a copy of the re-issued papers.
The Monitoring Officer then introduced the Complainant and one of the
Subject Members (Subject Member A) to the Committee. Subject Member B
was not present. She also introduced the Independent Person, Mr A Oram,
and explained that as this was the first time that the Committee had dealt with
a complaint under the new process, the Independent Person had been
requested to provide his views on it.
The Chairman invited the Investigating Officer, Mr D Johnson, to present his
report:
The Investigating Officer informed the Committee that he had intended to
gather the information and present his report as soon as possible but
unfortunately the process had taken much longer than he had anticipated. He
explained that this was a transitional case. The events had taken place before
1 July 2012 and the allegations had been made under the original Code of
Conduct but it had been dealt with under the current Standards
arrangements. Ultimately it would be referred back to the Parish Council.
Standards Committee
2
17 December 2012
The Investigating Officer outlined the process that he had undertaken in
compiling his report:
He had spoken to the Complainant first and taken a full statement. He then
contacted the two Subject Members. Subject Member A responded and met
with him, Subject Member B did not respond. Several further attempts were
made to contact him but no response was received. A draft report was issued
and then Subject Member B contacted him. The Investigating Officer felt that
Subject Member B should have an input into the report so a supplemental
report was issued. He did not hear from Subject Member B again. The
Investigating Officer informed the Committee that the statement of Subject
Member B was not a formal statement but was based on a series of
interviews. The same applied to the contractor employed by the parish council
to maintain their website.
The Investigating Officer then outlined the background to the case and the
allegations against the two Subject Members. He explained to the Committee
that having considered all the evidence he found that Subject Member A was
not in breach of the Code of Conduct. In relation to Subject Member B, he
had found that there were two breaches of the Code – for failing to treat
others with respect and for bringing the office of Councillor and the Council
into disrepute.
The Investigating Officer told the Committee that he had reconsidered his
conclusions in light of the Independent Person’s view on the complaint but
having reviewed the evidence his stance remained the same – that Subject
Member B’s behaviour fell below that expected of a councillor and that a
breach of the Code of Conduct had been committed.
Members were invited to put questions to the Investigating Officer:
Mr B Hannah asked why there was no statement from the Clerk included
within the report. The Investigating Officer replied that the Clerk had not been
present at the meeting when the alleged misconduct had taken place and she
could therefore not be counted as a witness. In response to a further
question regarding Subject Member B’s length of employment, he confirmed
that he had considerable experience in his current role.
The Chairman invited the Independent Person, Mr A Oram to present his
findings on the complaint to the Committee. He explained that the papers
provided to the Committee clearly set out his views. He felt that that the main
issue was whether the conduct in question was so serious that it constituted a
breach of the Code of Conduct. He felt that although Subject Member B’s
conduct was unfortunate and ill-advised it did not constitute a breach. He
concluded that he agreed with the Investigating Officer’s finding that Subject
Member A was not in breach of the Code of Conduct.
Members were invited to put questions to the Independent Person:
1. Mr P Williams asked the Independent Person to explain his reference to
the Nolan Principles in his report. The Independent Person said that the
main principle was ‘Leadership’ and that a councillor had a duty to
consider carefully any accusations against another person and ensure
that they had weighed up the evidence fully before repeating it.
Standards Committee
3
17 December 2012
2. Mr B Hannah asked if the Independent Person had any views on Subject
Member B’s failure to respond to repeated requests from the Investigating
Officer for a statement. The Independent Person said that he agreed such
behaviour was unhelpful but he could only consider the evidence before
him.
The Chairman thanked the Investigating Officer and the Independent Person
for their input. He said that the Committee would now reach a decision on the
complaint and he requested that the Complainant, Subject Member A, the
Independent Person and the Investigating Officer left the room during the
ensuing discussion. They left the room at 2.45pm.
Members discussed the complaint:
1. Mr G Allen said that he agreed with the Investigating Officer’s findings. He
felt that the allegations that Subject Member B had made against the
Complainant and the Contractor had not been substantiated in any way.
2. Mr M Coates commented that the Parish Council had not dealt with
Subject Member B’s behaviour effectively.
3. Mr P Williams said that he believed the Complainant also had a case to
answer regarding his behaviour. The Monitoring Officer reminded Mr
Williams that the Investigating Officer had found no issues of misconduct
relating to the Complainant.
4. Mr B Hannah commented that he felt that the Clerk was central to the
whole issue. Mr A Nash agreed. He said that the Clerk was vital to the
investigation and should be in attendance to give her account of events.
The Monitoring Officer replied that the Clerk had not attended the meeting
where the alleged misconduct had taken place and as it was the
comments made at that meeting that were alleged to be in breach of the
Code it would not be beneficial to have the Clerk’s input. She
acknowledged that the Clerk may be able to provide information on the
background to events but it would not explain why Subject Member B had
behaved the way that he did at the meeting in question.
5. Mr N Smith said that the matter should have been dealt with earlier. He
believed that if the Chairman of the Parish Council had controlled the
meeting in question more effectively then the alleged misconduct could
have been avoided.
6. Mr G Allen said that he was concerned that the Independent Person and
the Investigating Officer had reached different conclusions on one aspect
of the complaint. The Monitoring Officer explained that the Independent
Person was not overseeing the investigation just providing his views on it.
The difference in opinion was not substantial, it just concerned whether
the level of behaviour breached the Code of Conduct.
The Monitoring Officer asked the Committee whether they wished to make
any recommendations to the Parish Council. The Chairman felt the
Committee should recommend further action. He reminded Members that it
would only be a recommendation and it was up to the Parish Council whether
they wished to implement it
Mr A Nash commented that he believed that there were several strong
characters involved in this case and that a restorative approach may be
preferable. He informed the Committee that the Norfolk Association of Local
Councils (NALC) held mediation sessions for parish councils. The Monitoring
Officer replied that this would have been an option at an earlier stage of the
Standards Committee
4
17 December 2012
process but it was down to the Parish Council to implement and they would
be unlikely to pursue this approach. She advised that any recommendations
should focus on the breaches committed.
It was proposed by Mr B Hannah, seconded by P Williams and
RESOLVED
To accept the findings of the Investigating Officer that Subject Member B was
in breach of the following paragraphs of Overstrand Parish Council’s Code of
Conduct:
•
•
Failing to treat others with respect
Bringing his office of Councillor and the Council into disrepute
and that Subject Member A was neither complicit in the breaches of conduct
on the part of Subject Member B nor did he commit any breach of the Code of
Conduct by his failure to manage the conflict engendered.
The following recommendations were made to the Parish Council:
•
•
That Subject Member B should make a written apology to the
Complainant
That the Parish Council should undertake a programme of development
on the conduct of meetings.
At 3.25pm, the Complainant, Subject Member A, the Independent Person and
the Investigating Officer were invited back into the room. The Chairman
informed them of the Committee’s decision. Subject member A asked how the
Parish Council would be notified of the decision. The Monitoring Officer said
that she would write to the Parish Clerk on behalf of the Committee informing
them of the decision.
The meeting concluded at 15.35 pm
___________
Chairman
Standards Committee
5
17 December 2012
Agenda Item No____7________
PARISH COUNCILS AND STANDARDS
Summary:
To update members on Parish Council development
and support
Conclusions:
That there are advantages to meeting parish councils to
discuss standards issues
Recommendations:
Members to consider the report and instruct the
Interim Monitoring Officer as to engagement with
parish councils.
Source: David Johnson, Interim Monitoring Officer: 01603 222313
Parish Council Complaints
1.
Under the Localism Act 2011 arrangements adopted by North Norfolk District
Council, complaints against Parish Councillors are received by the Monitoring
Officer and assessed in the usual way. They may be referred for
investigation by a person appointed by the Monitoring Officer. They may be
dealt with in some other way. The new regime is considerably more flexible
than the previous one. Ultimately, however, at the end of every Parish
Council case it is the Parish Council itself which determines the guilt or
otherwise of a Councillor and applies such sanction as it sees fit.
2.
As members will see from the other report of the Monitoring Officer on this
agenda the levels of complaints made against Parish Council members are
not, at present, high. The stated aim of the New Standards Regime was to
prevent the Standards Regime being used as a "vehicle for petty, malicious
and politically-motivated complaints against Councillors." It is difficult to
assess whether the current low level of complaints is a reflection of these
values being taken on board by Councillors.
Standards and Conduct Training and Support
3.
At their last meeting members resolved to instigate a programme of training,
support and development for Parish Council within North Norfolk's District.
There being some 122 Parishes within North Norfolk this is undoubtedly an
ambitious aim. Nevertheless, a rolling programme of engagement with Parish
Councils to explain our role and to promote understanding of Standards and
Conducts practices and procedures can only be of benefit to the Local
Government community and public perception of Councillors.
Proposals
4.
Your Chairman, the Monitoring Officer and the Council's Independent Person
Mr. Alex Oram have met to give thought as to how the promotion of
6
Standards and Conduct at Parish level can be promoted and how confidence
in the new arrangements can be fostered. We were unanimously of the view
that formal, structured events (for example, a conference style gathering)
would be likely to be of less value than a more informal and location based
approach. So, for example, we could suggest to all Parishes that, if they
wished, delegates from the Council could attend at a Parish Council meeting either as part of a routine meeting or one specially called for the purpose and following a brief presentation from the Monitoring Officer, use a question
and answer session and a general discussion as a way of raising that
Parish's own particular concerns and issues over Standards and Conduct.
5.
If these sessions proved useful and successful initially then further sessions
could be held on a rolling basis. It may be that adjacent Parishes might agree
to hold a joint session.
6.
Attendees from North Norfolk District Council should probably include the
Monitoring Officer together with, as diaries permit, the Council's Independent
Person and the Chairman, Vice Chairman and / or other members of the
Standards Committee.
7.
The Monitoring Officer and the Independent Person have both prepared
materials to use in the opening part of each session and will be able to
answer questions. However, I am sure that Parish Councillors would be
equally very keen to understand from members of Standards Committee how
they see their approach to Standards and Conduct and, I suspect, how they
consider the seriousness of allegations and what approach they would take to
sanctions.
8.
The Monitoring Officer will be very interested to receive members' views on
the issue of standards and parishes and to hear further suggestions and
comments on the proposals.
David Johnson
Interim Monitoring Officer
7