Agenda and minutes

None.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 6 December 2006, attached.

The minutes of the meeting held on 28 February 2007 be received and approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

[The Committee noted it had approved a review of parts of the Planning Protocol at its previous meeting. As some of the proposed changes to the Members’ Code of Conduct would affect this, it was agreed the work would be suspended until the new Code had been approved.

The Head of Legal Services would consider writing to all Members of the planning pool (copying in Members of Standards Committee) advising them on the correct conduct to follow until the amendments to the Code of Conduct and the Protocol had been made.]

Members are asked to declare any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

None.

This report summarises the way in which some key principles of natural justice are set out in the various protocols for implementation by the relevant decision-making bodies and asks whether any changes should be considered in the light of experience.

Report of the Head of Legal Services attached.

The Head of Legal Services be asked to draft changes (on the lines of paragraph F3 in the Planning Protocol) to Section E of the Members’ Protocol (processes relating to quasi judicial bodies) to ensure there was greater clarity and consistency on the effect of natural justice in all quasi-judicial decision-making.

[The Committee noted there were different levels of detail in the way the Members’ Protocol dealt with similar procedural issues, arising from the principals of natural justice across the Council’s quasi-judicial decision-making bodies. For mostly historical reasons, the Planning Protocol was more specific and for example, said clearly a Councillor who was not present for an entire item could not speak or vote on it.

The Licensing Protocol and Section E of the Members’ Protocol set out the need to comply with natural justice, but in less detail. The latter, in particular, would benefit from a major redraft. Meanwhile, the question of speaking and voting without having been present was considered incompatible with a fair hearing. The Committee asked changes to Section E and to the Licensing Protocol be drafted and put to Council. 

Members discussed the meaning and implications of natural justice and agreed they and officers could benefit from some training in it.

It was suggested agendas of committees containing some, but not all, quasi-judicial functions, identified the items when this kind of decision was being made.]

Interviews for a new Independent Member of Standards Committee are taking place on 22 February, which is after this agenda is printed.

The Committee is asked to recommend Council appoint the person recommended by the interview panel.

1. Council be recommended to appoint Mr Steven Gould as an Independent Member of the Standards Committee with effect from 6 March 2007 until 26 August 2010.

2. The Head of Paid Service be requested to produce a report recommending Council approve an increase in the Standards Committee’s composition from nine to 11 (six Independent Members and five Councillors).

3. Subject to the approval of the Head of Paid Service’s report, Mr Norman Buckley be appointed as an Independent Member of the Standards Committee with effect from 6 March 2007 until 26 August 2010.

[The Committee noted there had been a very strong field of applicants and it had been difficult to make a decision.

Given this, and the likely increase in the Committee’s workload with the proposed creation of local sifting in the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill going through Parliament, this was an opportune moment to increase the Committee’s size. It was agreed Council should be recommended to increase this to 11.]

This report draws attention to the Consultation Paper issued by the Secretary of State which proposes significant changes to the model code of conduct for Councillors and Members of Committees of local authorities.

The report comments on the proposals and invites the Committee’s views on a response to them.

Report of the Head of Legal Services attached.

1. The Head of Legal Services be asked to write a response to the Consultation on Amendments to the Model Code of Conduct for Local Authority Members on the Committee’s behalf and include the following points:

(i) A recommendation to use the Council’s words from its version of the Code, regarding unlawful discrimination. 

(ii) The provision specifically proscribing bullying be welcomed.

(iii) The changes to the paragraph on disclosure of confidential information should include a reference to the Freedom of Information Act and a definition of the public interest.

(iv) Support for the changes regarding behaviour outside official duties.

(v) Support for the change regarding improper influence to include ‘attempt’ (which was a much more precise word than ‘threaten’).

(vi) The addition of a reference to the publicity code not be supported, as this provision was better dealt with in other ways.

(vii) Support for the proposed change to reporting breaches of the Code, as it would allow party group leaders to discuss any concerns about Members’ conduct without also potentially being in breach of the Code.

(viii) Support for the proscription of intimidation.

(ix) Suggestion the value of gifts or hospitality that must be declared rose each year with inflation. A five year period for declaration at meetings was excessive. The words in the Code should also be made more specific, making clear only gifts given because of someone’s position as a Councillor need be declared.

(x) The change of the reference to friends and relatives was of no benefit without definition. The Committee’s suggestion instead of “close personal association” was: “a colleague or associate in a professional or personal capacity.”

(xi) Civil partners needed to be specifically included in the definition of family (or relative).

(xii) The new public service interest was very helpful, but there was concern about the inclusion of lobbying groups. A public interest test was needed to ensure this only applied to groups serving a public purpose.

(xiii) Support for Councillors being able to be allowed to participate in meetings even when they had a prejudicial interest.

(xiv) Support for the changes to interests at overview and scrutiny committees.

(xv) Support for the use of gender-neutral language throughout.

(xvi) The whole document should be written in the second person, as it was much easier to read and more likely to engage people. This was gradually becoming accepted practice for all organisations with codes of conduct.

(xvii) The Government be urged to abandon its original timetable to allow it to consider all the consultation responses in detail.

2. Subject to the proposed changes to prejudicial interests being agreed, the Head of Legal Services be asked to draft a protocol setting out issues to consider as to when it might be appropriate for a Councillor to be properly permitted participate in a meeting when he/she had such an interest.

3. The responses of London Councils and the Local Government Association be emailed to the Committee once they were received.

[The Head of Legal Services explained there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

To consider whether to have an item on the Committee’s agenda to enable its members to report back, where appropriate to the Committee's business, on attendance at meetings and other member events attended, including training.

The item be noted.

[It was agreed to be useful to have an item on the agenda to allow for appropriate feedback. 

The Independent Members reported on recent meetings of the Council they had attended. They had been impressed with the way the meetings had been run and the courtesy afforded to the public, particularly at Overview and Scrutiny Committees.]

The Committee is asked to note the recent Light Touch Ethical Audit of the authority by the Improvement and Development Agency (I&DeA) and to authorise the Chair, in consultation with the Vice Chairs, to take any action arising.

1. The item be noted.

2. The Committee’s Chair be authorised to take any urgent action arising from the review on its behalf.

[The Committee noted there had been a feedback session which reported the results of the ethical audit, just before its meeting, and which most of its Members had attended.

A number of strengths had been identified and a variety of issues raised. Some were simple changes; others required discussion, or had resource implications.

One issue raised by the inspection team was the need to raise the Committee’s profile. It was suggested photos and contact details of Independent Members be included on the Council’s website, as they were not seeking to stay anonymous. Declarations of interests should also be included, as the Committee should be seen to be setting a good example.

It was suggested more was done to mix the Independent Members and Overview and Scrutiny Committee co-optees, for example at training events.]

This report updates the work programme for the Committee and seeks its views on future priorities.

Report of the Head of Legal Services attached. 

The report be noted.

[There was a lot of work to do on training – especially with the need to train all Members on the new Code – and it was suggested the Member Training Group was involved. The Chair hoped to introduce each session herself and the other Independent Members were encouraged to get involved to help raise the Committee’s profile.

Items suggested for the work programme included, in approximate order of priority:

• The new Code of Conduct
• Training on the new Code for all Members
• Updating the Planning and Licensing Protocols in the light of the new Code
• The Standards Board’s roadshow and annual assembly
• Considering the need for a new gambling protocol
• Placing more information on the intranet for access by Members
• Input to action on any Government code of conduct for officers
• Updating the use of computers protocol.

Additional items could be added during the year, should resources allow.

The Member/ Officer Protocol was also discussed and it was agreed work on revising it needed to start immediately.]

The latest bulletin from the Standards Board for England is attached. The Committee is invited to discuss or comment on any of the issues it raises.

1. The item be noted.

2. The Head of Legal Services investigate the possibility of piloting the development of the Standards Board’s monitoring and auditing role and decide whether the Council should volunteer, in consultation with the Committee’s Chair.

[The Committee discussed the best point for the Council to approve the new Code of Conduct, given the considerable amount of training to follow. It was agreed ideally this should be at the June meeting of Council and officers would arrange things accordingly. The Code could then come into effect in time for the September cycle of meetings.

Members considered whether to apply for any of the pilots proposed in the Bulletin. While all of these would involve scarce resources, it was agreed developing the Standards Board’s monitoring and auditing role looked very interesting and was an area in which the Committee had expertise. The Head of Legal Services would find out more about this, before deciding whether to apply.]