Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2007 (attached).

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 16 October 2007 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

(a)        Planning Protocol (Minute 16)

The Deputy Monitoring Officer drew attention to an issue which had arisen recently in relation to the new advice to members wishing to speak at Area Plans Sub-Committees despite having a prejudicial interest.  Members noted that the issue had related to an incorrect interpretation of the new procedure rather than any fault with the procedure.  Accordingly, further training was proposed for both members and officers.

RESOLVED:

(1)        That in addition to the proposed training, an item be placed on the agenda for the next meeting of Development Control Committee Chairmen;

(2)        That Parish Councillors be invited to the relevant training session.

(b)       New Code of Conduct (Minute 17)

The Deputy Monitoring Officer reported that all of the outstanding Registration of Interest forms had been received from Parish/Town Councillors.

(Monitoring Officer) To declare interests in any item on the agenda.

No declarations of interest were made pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct.

To consider the attached report.

The Committee considered a report on a consultation document issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government in relation to orders and regulations regarding the conduct of local authority members in England.  The Deputy Monitoring Officer advised that the consultation document had sought views by 15 February 2008 and, in order to comply with that timescale, members had been asked to submit views in order that officers could co?ordinate a reply.  However, the Department for Communities and Local Government had granted an extension of time in order to allow the Committee to formulate its views at this meeting.

The Committee addressed the questions on which comments were sought in the consultation paper.

RESOLVED:

That the Monitoring Officer respond to the consultation document issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government incorporating the following views:

1.         (Initial Assessment Arrangements)

There should be three separate sub-committees each comprising three members.  There should be a clear separation of membership between the initial assessment of the complaint and the sub-committee, which will deal with any appeal.  At the third stage (adjudication) there should be some flexibility on the membership of that body so as to ensure that finding the requisite three members is not made unduly difficult.  A system whereby the three sub-committees may be appointed on an ad hoc basis according to circumstances is favoured rather than having a pre-determined membership, which is felt to be too inflexible for local needs.

2.         (Allegations made to more than one Standards Committee)

It should be for the authorities concerned to agree on how the complaint should be dealt with.  There should be regulations, which enable the Standards Board for England to facilitate an agreement on how to proceed where the matter cannot be resolved locally.

3.         (Timescale for Making Initial Decisions)

A non-statutory deadline of 20 working days is favoured based on guidance by the Standards Board for England.  It is thought that this is a more flexible way of dealing with the deadline, which could be changed according to experience.

4.         (Notification to Councillors)

Where a complaint is referred to a Standards Committee for initial review, the appropriate time to issue notification to the member who is subject to a complain should be when the Standards Committee receives a copy of the initial review report.  Notification should not be held over until after any appeal or to the commencement of any investigation.  It should be for the Monitoring Officer to undertake this notification on the Standards Committee's behalf.

5.         (Monitoring Officer References back to the Standards Committee)

The circumstances under which the Monitoring Officer will refer a case back to the Standards Committee should be prescribed but if any new facts arise at that stage these should not be used to extend the original complaint.  The process should be strictly linked to the nature of the original complaint and not any other information.

6.         (Maximum Sanction)

Standards Committees should have a maximum sanction available of six months suspension or partial suspension  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

Recommendation:

To consider asking the Council to review the size of this Committee.

(Monitoring Officer) In anticipation that the proposals for sub-committees of Standards Committees set out in the consultation document of the Department of Communities and Local Government (agenda item 4) will be incorporated into the regulations and orders for local assessment, the Committee are invited to express views to the Council on possible changes to the size of this Committee.

Standards Committees must have a minimum of:

(a)   three members (two elected members and one independent member);

(b)   25% as independent lay members if the Committee is more than three people;

(c)   an independent chairman (from April 2008);

(d)   one parish or town council member if the authority has responsibilities for those councils.

The Standards Board recommends:

(a)   at least six people as a minimum (three elected members and three independent members); and

      (b) two, or possibly three, parish or town council members if the authority has responsibilities for those councils.

The Monitoring Officer invited the Committee to express initial views on possible changes to the size of the Committee in anticipation that the proposals for sub-committees of Standards Committees set out in the consultation document of the Department for Communities and Local Government would be incorporated into the regulations and orders for local assessment.

Members noted that the Standards Committee had to be made up of a minimum of:

(a)        three members (two elected members and one independent member);

(b)        25% as independent lay members if the Committee was more than three people;

(c)        an independent Chairman (from April 2008);

(d)        one Parish or Town Council member if the Authority had responsibilities for those councils.

In addition the Standards Board had recommended:

(a)        at least six people as a minimum (three elected members and three independent members); and

(b)        two, or possibly three, Parish or Town Council members if the Authority had responsibilities for those councils.

RESOLVED:

That this Committee express a preference in principle for increasing the membership to three district councillors, three independent members and three local council representatives.

Recommendation:

To consider attendance at a course on the local assessment of complaints.

(Monitoring Officer) LGG, the limited training arm of Solicitors in Local Government and affiliated to the Association of Council Secretaries and Solicitors are running courses on the Code of Conduct and “Local First Sieve” for members of Standards Committees and officers.

The cost of the course is £3,500 plus VAT and comprises an evening session of approximately three hours. Braintree District Council is making arrangements for a session providing for up to 75 attendees and has invited other Essex authorities to send representatives.

An initial interest has been registered with Braintree District Council. A date has yet to be set. Members are asked to indicate if they would like to attend.

The Monitoring Officer reported that LGG, the limited training arm of Solicitors in Local Government and affiliated to the Association of Council Secretaries and Solicitors were running courses on the Code of Conduct and "Local First Sieve" for members of Standards Committees and officers.

Braintree District Council had advised that they were making arrangements for a session providing for up to 75 attendees and had invited other Essex authorities to send representatives.

Members of the Committee confirmed that they wished to attend this training session.

RESOLVED:

(1)     That Braintree District Council be advised that members of this Committee and officers supporting the Committee would wish to attend the training session; and

(2)     That Braintree District Council be advised that it would be preferable for the training session to be arranged shortly after elections and annual meetings in May 2008.

Recommendation:

To undertake three cases from the Standards Board’s training exercise.

(Monitoring Officer)   The Standards Board has created a training exercise to help standards committees develop their ability to assess new complaints. The exercise is based on a pilot that the Standards Board ran in 2007 with approximately 50 participating local authorities.

Details of the exercise are attached. Members will note that the full exercise requires approximately three hours which is considered too long to be addressed at this meeting. The first three cases are attached for members to consider at this time and others can be included on the agenda for the next meeting or at a special session if preferred.

The Committee noted that the Standards Board had created a training exercise to help Standards Committees develop their ability to assess new complaints.  The exercise was based on a pilot that the Standards Board had run in 2007 with approximately 50 participating local authorities.

The Committee received details of the exercise and noted that the full exercise required approximately three hours to complete.

RESOLVED:

That the officers make arrangements for an informal session of the Committee to undertake the training exercise on a date shortly after the  Annual meeting of the District Council in May 2008.

(Monitoring Officer) To note the attached schedule.

The Committee noted the current position of allegations made to the Standards Board for England regarding District and Parish/Town Councillors.

(Monitoring Officer) The calendar for 2007/08 provides for a meeting of the Committee on 8 April 2008.

Additional meetings can be arranged as and when required by the Committee.

The Council’s draft calendar of meetings for 2008/09 provides for meetings of the Committee on 15 July 2008, 13 October 2008, 27 January 2009 and 14 April 2009.

The Committee noted that the calendar for 2007/2008 provided for a meeting of the Committee on 8 April 2008.

The Committee also noted that the Council's calendar of meetings for 2008/09 provided for meetings of the Committee on 15 July 2008, 13 October 2008, 27 January 2009 and 14 April 2009