To consider a report setting out a summary of the Council’s ethical governance and arrangements over the last twelve months.

The Committee considered a report which provided Members with a summary of the Council’s ethical governance and arrangements since July 2014 and sought authorisation to amend Part F2 the Constitution by removing the opportunity for appealing against a finding of breach of the Code of Conduct by the Standards Sub-Committee. 

The meeting was reminded of the Council’s obligations under the Localism Act 2011 and the measures taken by the Council to meet its responsibilities with regard to ethical standards including the Code of Conduct, Register of Interests and the handling of complaints.  The meeting also noted the success of the joint panel of Independent Persons in providing at least one Independent Person whose views would be sought and taken into account by the Monitoring Officer as part of the initial assessment and investigation stages of the procedure and by the Standards Sub-Committee itself during the hearing process.

Turning to the handling of complaints the Committee noted the procedure adopted by the Council as set out in Part F2 of the Constitution, a copy of which was attached at Appendix A to the report.  Members also noted the numbers of complaints received, their origins and the costs involved whilst

Appendix B to the report showed the cumulative totals of complaints received since June 2012.  Members were aware of the delays in dealing with historic complaints and how these had been dealt with in part by the implementation of a new tracking system and appointment of a Corporate Lawyer to assist with the work.  The figures in Appendix B revealed that the processes in place were working well with both an increasing number of complaints being dealt with overall and the total number of complaints open at the end of each month being significantly reduced.  The Corporate Lawyer informed the meeting that there were currently only two complaints outstanding, an existing complaint awaiting resolution and a new complaint which had been received at the end of the previous week.

The Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, congratulated the officers for their successful reduction of the number of outstanding cases.

Members noted the measures taken in connection with training and guidance for town and parish councillors and Clerks.  The Committee also noted the action which had been taken with particular reference to improving the Council’s own procedures and creating efficiencies when dealing with complaints.  In particular, those complaints identified as minor were referred back to the town or parish council to resolve.

Following a query by a Member the Corporate Lawyer explained that all cases, including those referred back to town and parish councils to resolve, were recorded by this Council as a complaint.

The Committee next considered the process by which allegations were dealt with, including the right of appeal by either the complainant(s) or the subject Member as set out under paragraph 12 of Part F2 of the Constitution.  The Assistant Director Legal and Democratic Services (interim) and Monitoring Officer, in response to a Member’s query stated that anecdotal evidence suggested that 50% of comparator local authorities did not include an appeal stage.  In support of the removal of this stage from this Council’s Constitution he suggested that there was sufficient protection of rights through the involvement and input from the Independent Person in the procedure coupled with at least three impartial Members at the Standards Sub-Committee hearing to ensure sufficient safeguards.  The Assistant Director Legal and Democratic Services (interim) and Monitoring Officer also drew Members’ attention to the costs involved with the appeal process and commented that, in view of the above points and the limited grounds of appeal and restricted sanctions which could be imposed, the appeal process represented a disproportionate use of the Council’s resources.  He stressed that the removal of the right of appeal would not prejudice the subject Members but would reduce process times and ensure a more efficient use of resources.  The Committee indicated its support for the removal of the appeal stage.

A Member sought the provision of mandatory training for town and parish councillors and referred to the challenging and unreasonable behaviour experienced from some.  In response the Director of Improvement and Corporate Services informed the meeting that although this Council did provide training it had no authority to require councillors to undertake it.  The Corporate Lawyer commented that the Clerks to town and parish councils were advised to contact the National Association of Local Councils (NALC) for guidance on this issue.  She added that unreasonable behaviour on a personal level had previously been countered to an extent by letters being sent from the Monitoring Officer to the councillors concerned.

Arising from a query regarding the failure to complete and submit declarations of interest forms within the statutory timescale of 28 days from the day of taking office the Corporate Lawyer stated that the Clerks to town and parish councils were fully aware of this deadline and the consequences as were the councillors themselves.  This Council offered advice and actively pursued outstanding forms.  She added that the failure to declare interests at meetings was of greater concern than a failure to keep a councillor’s entries on the register of interests up to date.

NOTED

that Central Bedfordshire Council has complied with its obligations in respect of ethical standards under the Localism Act 2011 for the period since July 2014.

RESOLVED

that paragraph 12 of Part F2 of the Constitution, in relation to appeals from the Standards Sub-Committee under the ‘Arrangements for Dealing with Standards Allegations under the Localism Act 2011’, be deleted.