To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on 7 June 2012 (copy attached).

RESOLVED

that the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on 7 June 2012 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record subject to the following amendments:

1          Under the list of those Members present delete ‘Mrs J G Lawrence’ and insert ‘D J Lawrence’;

2          Under the list of those Members present delete ‘Mrs J G D J Lawrence’ and insert ‘Mrs J G Lawrence’

To receive any declarations of interests from Members.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman and any matters of communication.

None.

To receive petitions from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 2 of Part A4 of the Constitution.

No petitions were received from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 2 of Part A4 of the Constitution.

To receive any questions, statements or deputations from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 1 of Part A4 of the Constitution.

No questions, statements or deputations were received from members of the public in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure as set out in Annex 1 of Part A4 of the Constitution.

To consider the appointment of independent persons in order to meet the requirements of the Localism Act 2011.

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services regarding the appointment of a joint panel of independent persons in collaboration with Bedford Borough, Luton Borough and Milton Keynes Councils and the fire authorities for Buckinghamshire and Bedfordshire.  Members were aware that it was a requirement under the Localism Act 2011 to appoint such persons for the purposes of consultation in connection with the investigation and determination of complaints relating to the Code of Conduct.  Members were also aware that discussion on this matter had taken place at the previous meeting of the Committee (minute GPC/12/8 refers).

The meeting noted that, following the placing of advertisements in the local press and on the respective Councils’ websites, 21 applications to be an independent person had been received.  Following shortlisting 13 applicants had been interviewed from which 10 had been recommended for appointment.

To assist Members the Head of Legal and Democratic Services circulated a list of revised recommendations for his report which took account of the recent developments, including the outcome of the interviews, and which included a list of the proposed independent persons.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services drew Members’ attention to the transitional provisions implemented by the government which would have the effect of allowing a former independent Member of Central Bedfordshire Council’s Standards Committee to act as an independent person for the Council until 30 June 2013 only.  He also commented on the need to agree the detailed terms and conditions for the independent persons and provide necessary training.

A Member referred to the proposed four year appointment period for the independent persons and queried whether this period should coincide with the term of office served by Councillors.  In response the Head of Legal and Democratic Services stressed that it was of greater importance that a general period of stability was provided during which the appointees could gain experience and consolidate their position.  Members concurred with this view, feeling that it was in the Council’s interest that the appointment procedure for independent persons did not have to take place at the same time as the formation of a new Council following an election.

With regard to the adoption of a similar four year appointment period by other participating authorities the Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that Bedford Borough Council had agreed to this but the position of the others was currently unknown.  He stressed that efforts were being made to ensure as much commonality as was possible between the six authorities.

Full discussion then took place on the provision of training for the independent persons.  The Head of Legal and Democratic Services stated that whilst training would be provided for all appointees there would, in the meantime, be a need to process the Code of Conduct complaints that had already been received.  As such it would be necessary to make use of those independent persons who had already gained training and experience as independent Members under the previous Standards regime  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

To further consider the registration and declaration of Members’ interests as required by the Localism Act 2011.

The Committee considered a report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services who advised that the Committee was being asked to consider two issues.  The first related to concerns expressed by Members at a presentation prior to the last meeting of the Council on 14 June 2012, and then at the meeting itself, about their right to participate and vote at meetings when certain items of business were under discussion and, in particular, when a Member had a disclosable pecuniary interest in an item.  The second was that of identifying what, if any, additional interests should be registered by Members in addition to the disclosable pecuniary interests required under the Localism Act 2011.

a)         Members’ Participation - Dispensations

To assist Members the Head of Legal and Democratic Services circulated a revised recommendation which set out proposed dispensations relating to Members participation at meetings.  He reminded the Committee that the Localism Act contained no general dispensations and so those before Members had been largely based on general dispensations contained in the Council’s previous Code of Conduct.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services reminded the Committee that the previous Code of Conduct had contained a specific provision allowing Members to attend meetings, even when they had a prejudicial interest, but only for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to an item of business, providing that members of the public were also allowed to attend the meeting for the same purpose, whether under a statutory right or otherwise.  He explained there was no such provision in the Localism Act which simply stated that Members with disclosable pecuniary interests in items could not participate in the discussion and voting on such items.  The Head of Legal and Democratic Services stated, however, that if the representations, answering of questions or giving of evidence by Members took place prior to the discussion on those items, as had occurred under the previous Code of Conduct provision, he was of the opinion, following consultation with other monitoring officers, that dispensations could be granted to Members to do so.

A Member referred to the need to ensure that, if a Member gained a dispensation, he or she should leave the meeting room as had also been required under the previous Code of Conduct.  The Head of Legal and Democratic Services stated that the Localism Act allowed councils discretion on this issue and sought Members’ views on this.  A Member commented that a member of the public, having made a statement, was not required to leave a meeting.  However, the meeting was aware that the requirement for Members to leave had been introduced into the Code as a result of concerns that councillors, by remaining within a meeting room could still, by their presence, exert undue influence.  Following discussion the Committee acknowledged that this position could arise and so, in order that Members could be seen by the public to be acting with integrity and in an open and transparent way, they should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.