Agenda Item 3
STANDARDS COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Standards Committee held on 13 November
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
Ms B Palmer
Mrs H Thompson
Mr P Williams
Co-opted
Members:
Mr G Allen
Mr A Bullen
Mrs M Evans
Mr H Gupta
Mrs A Shirley
Mr M Coates
Officers in
Attendance:
The Monitoring Officer
The Democratic Services Officer (ED)
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Mr R Barr, Mr A Nash and Mrs A Shirley
2.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received
.
3.
MINUTES
The Minutes of the Meeting of the Standards Committee held on 11
September 2012 were approved as a correct record.
4.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
There were no items of urgent business.
5.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None
Standards Committee
1
13 November 2012
6.
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.
7.
NEW STANDARDS REGIME
The Monitoring Officer informed the Committee that the new regime was now
implemented in full. The Committee was meeting regularly and the
Independent Person was assessing cases. The Monitoring Officer was
working through the backlog of transitional cases and screening new cases.
There were still some grey areas regarding the application of the DCLG Code
of Conduct and there was ongoing correspondence to try and clarify the
situation. The Monitoring Officer had recently attended a workshop for
Independent Persons at Broadland District Council and it was intended that
there would be more collaboration between Independent Persons across the
region in the future and they would work together to establish the role.
The Monitoring Officer suggested that it was time for the Committee to start
focusing on standards training for district and parish councillors. There was
still a lot of confusion regarding the type of complaint that could be dealt with
by the District Council and it would be helpful if the Monitoring Officer and
members of the Standards Committee could attend parish and town council
meetings to explain the role of the Committee and provide further information
on standards and conduct issues.
Members discussed the update:
1. Mr G Allen commented that the previous standards regime had focused
more on monitoring poor behaviour. From what he understood, the new
regime seemed to place more emphasis on improving standards. The
Monitoring Officer agreed. He said that the Localism Act stressed the
importance of promoting and maintaining high standards of conduct for
district and parish councillors.
2. Mr A Bullen sought clarification on the role of co-opted members of the
committee. The Monitoring Officer explained that they were full members
of the committee and were able to participate in debates but were not able
to vote. It was intended that they would represent an external, non-council
approach to standards issues. The Chairman added that she believed that
co-opted members played a valuable part in the committee as they were
able to provide a wider view on issues. Their participation would ensure
that the committee was not just inward-looking.
3. Mr H Gupta queried his role as a co-opted member. He wasn’t sure how
effective his contributions at meetings would be if he could not participate
in the voting process and his views could therefore effectively be overruled. The Chairman reminded Members that there had been a full
discussion about the role and value of co-opted members at the last
meeting of the committee. Mr B Hannah added that he valued the input of
the co-opted members. Mr P Williams agreed, he said that the co-opted
members had been selected for their knowledge and skills. He felt that
their neutrality was very important and the elected members should listen
to their views and take them into account.
4. Mr A Bullen suggested that the co-opted members of the committee could
undertake an assessment of the Standards Committee at some point to
Standards Committee
2
13 November 2012
check that it was performing well. The Chairman replied that she had no
problem with this. She felt that it was important for the committee to set a
high standard and be prepared to take this forward on a wider basis.
5. The Chairman suggested that a panel of committee members could
attend parish and town council meetings and offer help and advice on
standards and conduct issues. Mr P Williams agreed that training was
necessary but some parish councils may require more support than
others. Mr P W Moore commented that he had attended the training
session for Briston Parish Council and he felt that it had not been very
productive. It was important that the Committee agreed on their role in
advance so they could ensure that their input was effective. Mrs M Evans
endorsed this approach. She said that the objectives of the committee
should be robust and delivered in the right way. Mr M Coates added that it
could be helpful to use scenarios to illustrate particular problems that
could arise. Mrs M Evans added that although there were some councils
that may need assistance quite soon, it should be offered to everyone.
6. Mr G Allen commented that it was important to remember that the
Standards Committee was different to other committees. They could have
an effect on the decisions being made regarding complaints and the input
of co-opted members was vital. In many cases they had more knowledge
and experience than elected members.
The Chairman suggested that herself, the Monitoring Officer and the
Independent Person worked together to come up with a training programme
which they would then bring back to the committee for consideration. She
asked members to contact her if they had any ideas that they would like to
see incorporated.
8.
COMPLAINT REFERENCES 148, 150 AND 153
The Monitoring Officer explained that the three cases all shared common
characteristics – they all pre-dated the new regime and they had all been
assessed and referred for investigation. In each case the Investigating Officer
had not found a breach of the Code of Conduct. The Monitoring Officer had
considered them in conjunction with the Independent Person and they agreed
with the Investigating Officer’s findings. They were now coming before the
Standards Committee for a final decision.
The Monitoring Office advised the Committee that they were unlikely to
receive cases in this form again. These were all transitional cases that
predated July 2012.
Members discussed the cases:
1. Mr P Moore asked whether the Monitoring Officer believed that the
outcome would have been the same under the previous regime. He
confirmed that they would have because although the current Code of
Conduct was different, the process was the same.
2. Mr G Allen said that he agreed with the Monitoring Officer’s and
Independent Person’s assessment of the cases. He was concerned that
only a summary of each case was presented to the committee and felt
that there may not be sufficient evidence for Members to make a decision.
3. Mrs M Evans said that one of the cases would make a good scenario to
be used in training parish councils as it demonstrated how charities could
Standards Committee
3
13 November 2012
cause issues for parish councils and how they had tried several different
avenues to deal with the problem.
AGREED
To accept the findings of the Investigating Officer for each of the three cases.
9.
STANDARDS COMPLAINTS
The Monitoring Officer updated the Committee on the status of complaints
received. He explained that the list provided information on all the ‘live’ cases.
Members discussed the update:
1. Mr G Allen commented that Members needed to remain aware that the
Committee could be used for other purposes such as resolving a personal
dispute or grievance. The Monitoring Officer replied that there was a
screening process in place that aimed to weed out such cases.
2. Mr A Bullen asked when cases were referred to the Independent Person
for his input. The Monitoring Officer replied that he asked for his input
when he felt that he needed an additional view. He explained that when
no view was included with the case summary it indicated that the
Independent Person concurred with the Monitoring Officer’s assessment.
He said that he would ask the Independent Person to include a summary
paragraph for all cases in the future.
3. Mr G Allen said that he felt it would be useful if complainants could
provide information regarding their interest in making the complaint. The
Monitoring Officer replied that this was potentially a difficult area as a
complaint was not the ‘property’ of someone. He added that as part of the
screening process he could ask for an explanation if he had any concerns
regarding their motive for making the complaint.
The meeting concluded at 15.17 pm
___________
Chairman
Standards Committee
4
13 November 2012