Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed Members and Officers to this virtual meeting of the Standards Committee.

Having explained, the virtual meeting procedure rules in place, the following introductions were made by the Committee Services Manager:

Mr S Agutu – Interim Monitoring Officer

Mr P Hoey – Hoey Ainscough Associates Ltd  

Apologies for Absence had been received from Councillors Blanchard-Cooper and Tilbrook.

Members and Officers are invited to make any declarations of pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests that they may have in relation to items on this agenda, and are reminded that they should re-declare their interest before consideration of the item or as soon as the interest becomes apparent.

Members and Officers should make their declaration by stating:

a)            the item that they the interest in

b)            whether it is a pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interest

c)            the nature of the interest

No Declarations of Interest were made.

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2020 (as attached).

The Minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2020 were approved by the Committee as a correct record and would be signed by the Chairman as soon as possible following the Council’s resumption of normal working.

This report deals with the Review of the Case Assessment and Case Hearings review of the Local Assessment Process conducted by Hoey Ainscough Associates (HAA).

The Interim Monitoring Officer introduced this report following a review of the Local Assessment Procedure which had been undertaken as part of the review of the Code of Conduct. 

The Interim Monitoring Officer explained that the review of the procedure undertaken formed two parts, the hearing process and the case handling process  Also, to be noted in reviewing this matter was that the Appendices to the report contained tracked changes to highlight points raised by the Council’s Officer team in reviewing the procedure and those raised by Hoey Ainscough Associates (HAA) who had conducted this review.  The purpose was for the Committee to consider the changes and to confirm if these could be accepted.

In view of HAA’s role in this review, Mr Hoey was then invited to explain the detail of the draft document produced and to respond to any questions or queries from Members.  He explained that both appendices had been drafted to be used as internal documents and so once approved there would be the need to draft a simplified procedure for public viewing. 

The Committee worked through the Appendices to the report section by section with many issues being raised which have been set out below:

Appendix 1 – Case Handling Procedure

·         On the Initial Assessment – Paragraph 2 - the wording “This will be completed within 28 working days” had been struck out. Since it had been proposed to reduce this to ten days further on in the documents, the question asked was if this was workable and would this place undue stress onto Officers in terms of meeting this deadline?   Mr Hoey provided clarification in that the 10 days referred to and the 28 days referred to were two completely different elements of the process. The 28 days was saying that when a complaint was submitted, the Monitoring Officer (MO) had 28 days to complete the process, to decide if any action should or should not be taken.  The 10 days referred to later formed part of the process where the Subject Member (SM) would be invited to comment on the complaint before them – it was at that time that the SM had 10 days, within the 28 day timeframe to provide their views.

·         Concerns were expressed on this and reassurance was requested that the timeframe for complaints would not be extended to 38 days as this would make it too stressful for those involved. Mr Hoey confirmed that the 28 days was an absolute and that the 10 days were a sub-set within those 28 days. He then reminded Members of the process and the timeline in place for processing and dealing with complaints.  There were Councillors who were not happy with the wording in this section stating that it was not clear.  It was agreed that this would be looked at again and that the wording “This will be completed within 28 working days” should be reinstated in this paragraph.

·            Paragraph 3 stated that anonymous complaints would not be accepted unless  ...  view the full minutes text for item 483.

The Local Government Association has adopted a New Model Councillor’s Code of Conduct 2020.

It is open to the Council to adopt this Code of Conduct in whole, or with amendments.  Alternatively, the Council can amend its existing Member Code of Conduct. 

The Interim Monitoring Officer introduced this report, outlining the Model Code of Conduct that was produced by the Local Government Association. It was open to the Council to adopt this Code in whole, or with amendments.  Alternatively, the Council could amend its existing Member Code of Conduct.

            It was explained that the LGA Model Code used slightly different terminology for declaring interests.  The Interim Monitoring Officer had taken the view that the current Arun scheme for declaring interests was clearer than the LGA Model Code and so it was being recommended to the Committee that Appendix B of the LGA Model Code be substituted with the Arun Scheme of declarations of interest.

            In discussing the new Code, it was emphasised how important it was to ensure that as much as possible the Town and Parish Councils would also sign up and adopt this new code. 

            The Committee

                        RECOMMENDED TO FULL COUNCIL - That

1)     It notes that the adoption of a Code of Conduct for Members is merely one aspect of the overriding duty to promote and maintain high standards of conduct my Members;

2)     The Local Government Association’s New Model Member Code of Conduct 2020 be adapted with the substitution of the Arun Appendix B for the LGA Appendix B and adopted in principle as the proposed Statutory Arun Member Code of Conduct; and

3)     Where Committee agrees to 2 above, the Interim Monitoring Officer consult with the County Council and the ADC Parish Councils with a view to adopting a consistent code across Arun District.

The Localism Act 2011 requires the Council to appoint at least one independent person to its Standards Committee.  This Council recently appointed two new Independent Persons to supplement the support to its Standards Committee.  Their terms of appointment require a review by Standards Committee ahead of the one-year anniversary date. 

The Interim Monitoring Officer presented this report, which referred to the continuation of the appointment of two Independent Persons, in line with the terms of their original appointment.

The Committee

            RESOLVED – That

(1)          The appointment of John Cooke and Sandra Prail as Independent Persons to the Standards Committee be confirmed for the remainder of their term of office; and

(2)          The Interim Monitoring Officer be given authority to confirm the continuation of these appointments with the Independent Persons, as set out in the report.

To seek the Committee’s authority to recruit a replacement Independent Person, following the resignation of one Independent Person, in order to maintain the pool of four.

The Interim Monitoring Officer presented this report which informed the Committee that an existing Independent Person had resigned from the role, effective from 31 March 2021.  The Committee was asked to consider whether it wished to recruit a replacement in order to maintain the ‘pool’ of four Independent Persons.

The Committee was reminded that the Localism Act 2011 (Section 28) required local authorities to appoint at least one Independent Person to its Standards Committee.  The Council’s Constitution at Part 3, Paragraph 4.5 required the Committee to have access to three Independent Persons.

The Committee was advised that, should it agree to pursue a recruitment drive to fill the fourth post, any appointment of a successful candidate would be recommended to Full Council in line with the Constitution at Part 3; Para 4.5[7]).

In debating this item, the Committee thanked Mr Green for his long service as an Independent Person and for the dedication he had given to this role.

The Committee had mixed views in terms of whether the recruitment of a replacement IP was needed.  One Councillor supported the proposal to recruit a further IP in view of the number of Code of Conduct complaints that had been submitted recently as this would allow the workload of IPs to be more fairly distributed.

Other IPs spoke and confirmed that they felt the additional person was not needed as to have three IPs was adequate with the current workload not being overwhelming in any way at all. It was also important for each IP to experience consistency of work which with another IP would become less frequent.

Following discussion, Councillor Bennett proposed an amendment to Recommendations (1) and (2) in that they be replaced with a new Recommendation (1) to read “that the decision to recruit a replacement Independent Person to the Standards Committee at this time be deferred for twelve months to allow time to assess the workload for the Independent Persons with an update report being brought back to the Committee”

Councillor Edwards seconded this amendment.  On this being put to the vote it was declared CARRIED.

The Committee then returned to the substantive recommendations and

            RESOLVED – That 

(1)          the decision to recruit a replacement Independent Person to the Standards Committee be deferred for twelve months to allow time to assess the workload for the Independent Persons with an update report being brought back to the Committee”; and 

(2)       a vote of thanks be recorded in the minutes to Brian Green for his service to the community in his role as an Independent Person.

This report updates the Committee on the complaints against Councillors received since the last report.  The Committee is responsible for maintaining high standards of conduct by Members of the District and Town and Parish Councils, for monitoring operation of the Code of Conduct, and for considering the outcome of investigations in the event of breaches of the Code.

In presenting this report, the Committee were advised of any updates on Code of Conduct complaints received or completed since the last meeting.

            The Committee then

RESOLVED

That the Register of Complaints against Councillors and progress of any outstanding complaints be noted.

The Committee is asked to consider passing the following resolution:-

            That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and accredited representatives of newspapers be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they may involve the likely  disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 and Part 5 of Schedule 12A of the Act by virtue of the paragraph specified against the items.

The Committee

RESOLVED

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and accredited representatives of newspapers be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they may involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act by virtue of the paragraph specified against the items.

This report updates the Committee on the complaints against Councillors received over the past two years.

The Interim Monitoring Officer presented this report and provided verbal updates on several the cases included in the register.

Following a brief discussion, the Committee

RESOLVED

That the Register of Complaints against Councillors be noted.

The Chairman requested and the Committee agreed to a change in the order of the agenda to bring forward Item 13 [Data Protection Breach – Referral from the Audit & Governance Committee] to be considered next.

The Council is responsible for protecting personal data that is collected, processed, stored and disposed of, in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018. 

Following a data protection breach that the Council became aware of in July 2020, the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) recommended that the Council minimised the risk of future data protection breaches, by raising awareness of the importance of Members and Officers being familiar with Council policies and completing mandatory training.

The matter was considered by the Audit and Governance Committee on 19 November 2020, as a Governance issue, who in turn referred it to this Committee for any Member conduct issues.

The Committee received a report from the Interim Monitoring Officer outlining that the Council was responsible for protecting personal data that was collected, processed, stored and disposed of in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018.

            Following a data protection breach the Council had become aware of in July 2020, the Information Commissioners (ICO) recommended that the Council minimised the risk of future data protection breach by raising awareness of the importance of Members and Officers being familiar with Council policies and completing mandatory training.

            As a result of the data breach, the Audit & Governance Committee, as its meeting held on 19 November 2020, had considered the matter as a governance issue and had recommended that this Committee also be made aware of the matter to consider any needed Member Conduct issues.

            The Standards Committee was therefore asked to consider the matter and whether any further action should be taken.

            The Committee

                        RESOLVED

That the referral from the Audit & Governance Committee be noted and that no further action be taken.

A Subject Member has requested a review of the decision against them and this report is submitted in accordance with the Local Assessment Process which states that the Review will be referred to the Standards Committee for a decision via a report presented by the Monitoring Officer. 

(Prior to the consideration of this matter, Councillor English declared a Personal Interest in this matter and chose to leave the meeting as he was a complainant involved in this complaint).

            The Committee received a report from the Interim Monitoring Officer who reported that a Subject Member had requested a review of the decision made against them.  In line with the Council’s Local Assessment Process the Subject Member had submitted an appeal request which the Committee now needed to consider

Following discussion, the Committee

RESOLVED

That the request for a review of the Panel decision be refused.