Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Mr Gould.

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

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of

a)      the Standards Committee meeting held on 21 September 2009;

b)      the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee meeting held on 21 September 2009;

c)      the Standards Review Sub-Committee meeting held on 21 September 2009.

d)      the Standards Hearing Sub-Committee held on 13 October 2009;

attached

a)  The Minutes of the Standards Committee meeting held on 21 September 2009 be received and approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

b)  The Minutes of the Standards Assessment Sub-Committee meeting held on 21 September 2009 be received and approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

c)  The Minutes of the Standards Review Sub-Committee meeting held on 21 September 2009 be received and approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

d)  The Minutes of the Standards Hearing Sub-Committee meeting held on 13 October 2009 be received and approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

There were no representations from members of the public.

This report proposes to update the contents of the Members’ Protocol, including the Appendices, and change their status to that of Guidance.

Report for the Head of Legal and Electoral Services attached.

1. That discrete Planning and Licensing Protocols be retained and a sub-committee and procedure be established to hear complaints about breaches of the Protocols; this sub-committee and procedure to be separate from the hearings procedure for complaints about breaches of the Code of Conduct.
2. That authority be delegated to the working group established initially to review the Members’ Protocol to finalise the details of the proposed guidance in advance of presentation to Council, following incorporation of further suggested amendments, and also of additions by the Monitoring Officer.
3. That the Council be recommended to adopt the proposed guidance for incorporation in the constitution at the next appropriate meeting.

The Chair introduced the report and draft documents.  She explained that when the Protocol was developed, there were no statutory codes.  The national code of conduct now carries sanctions which are not available for breaches of the Protocol.  The Committee had noted that complainants were attempting to utilise both Code and Protocol which was both time-consuming and resource heavy for the Sub-committees to manage.  This Council was the only London Borough which had a double disciplinary system, though most others have protocols which they treat as guidance to members.

Standards Committee heard representations from Councillor Miller, Chair of the Planning Committee and Councillor Elengorn, Vice-chair of the Planning Committee which included the following points,

Ø      Their concern was primarily with the Planning Protocol which contained detailed guidance on issues such as lobbying which was not covered by the Code

Ø      The change of name from ‘Protocol’ to ‘Guidance’ was inappropriate as it suggested removal of a constraint

Ø      Although breach of a Protocol might only mean embarrassment, this was a sufficient deterrent.  Training could be used as a form of censure or, alternatively, removal from the Planning Committee

Ø      Loss of the Protocol would make it more difficult for the Chair to direct the Planning Committee on the issues it covered.  It also provided an immediate solution at the Planning Committee as a “light suit of armour” so that complaints to the Standards Committee were few

Ø      The Planning Protocol was a useful discrete document which Members had to read

Ø      All Members were happy with the current system which assisted in the making of fair decisions.

The Committee considered the points made to it carefully.  In discussion, the Committee noted that a free-standing document on which it could hear complaints might be retained as it was possible to establish a procedure and sanctions outside the Code under the general provisions of the Local Government Act.  Although the Committee was advised that the Protocol could not be linked to the Code, as the scope of the Code was clearly defined in law, it could be made clear that failure to observe the Protocol could possibly lead to a breach of the Code.  The Committee explored the value of establishing a sub-committee to hear a complaint of breach of Protocol.  This would apply to both planning and licensing protocols, be heard on written representations, and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

This report gives details of the experiences of those who attended the Annual Assembly of Standards Committees, organised and facilitated by Standards for England, along with enabling access to the materials from the event.

Report for the Head of Legal and Electoral Services attached.

1. That the Officer and Member reports be noted.

The Committee received reports from the Chair and the Legal Practice Manager who had both attended the Annual Assembly of Standards Committees.  They highlighted some key issues discussed which included proportionality and cost, the role of standards committees within the governance framework, improvements in complaints handling, and dealing with vexatious complaints.  Although the Conservative Party had indicated that if elected at the general election Standards for England would be abolished, the feeling at the Assembly was that there would be no impact within the first twelve months, should there be a change of Government.

The Committee’s work programme sets out the planned topics for the year.

Report of the Head of Democratic Services attached.

1. That the Work Programme be noted and updated as discussed.

The Committee raised concerns at the impasse reached on the Members’ IT Protocol.  It considered that ethics could be included within the proposed Guidance but that the IT Department should lay down the rules for usage of IT by Members.  It was therefore agreed that the Assistant Director of Finance and Corporate Services should be invited to the next meeting of the Committee to report on any progress made.

The Monitoring Officer reported that copies of the new Standards for England DVD were available for Standards Committee Members to borrow from the Members’ Library held by Democratic Services.

This report proposes the adoption of criteria for the initial assessment of complaints of alleged breaches of the Members’ Code of Conduct in the light of experience to date and of guidance.

Report for the Head of Legal and Electoral Services attached.

1. Having considered the approach outlined in the report, it be agreed that a checklist be developed for circulation to the Committee for approval.

Ms Fraser outlined the basis for the proposed assessment criteria, which had been informed by experience gained through the work of the Standards Assessment Sub-committee.  It was considered that the public needed improved information about dealing with complaints against a background of proportionality.  The Committee considered the criteria and suggested some amendments for clarity.  It was considered that a checklist would be useful.

[Mr Buckley was not present for this item]

This item enables members of the Committee to provide any relevant feedback in relation to the meetings that they have attended as observers since the last meeting.

Councillor Bennett raised the issue of dissemination of confidential reports to all councillors and concerns that there might be breaches of confidentiality.  The Committee was advised that it was important that Members, especially those undertaking scrutiny of decisions, had access to the necessary documentation to carry out their role.

[Mr Buckley was not present for this item]

Having regard to the particular nature of the business to be transacted, the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following item on the grounds that they were likely to disclose exempt information by virtue of paragraph 5 as defined in Access to Information Rule 10.4.

This report draws the Committee’s attention to a decision of an Appeal Tribunal (appointed by the President of the Adjudication Panel) and to consider any implications arising.

Report for the Head of Legal and Electoral Services attached.

1. That the decision of the Appeal Tribunal be noted.

The Committee discussed the decision of the Appeal Tribunal and considered that judicial review of this decision was not appropriate.  The decision did not bind the Appeal Tribunal or the Standards Committee.  Some disquiet was expressed that the Appeal Tribunal had not given regard to the local culture and therefore it was difficult for the Committee to extrapolate clear lessons. The Committee was already looking at assessment criteria.

[Mr Buckley and Councillor King were not present for this item]