Agenda and minutes

None declared.

Nominations for the position of Chair were invited.

RESOLVED:

that Councillor Ketan Sheth be elected Chair for this meeting only.

RESOLVED:

that the minutes of the previous meeting held on 22 January 2013 be approved as an accurate record of the meeting subject to the following:

      i.        That Sheila Darr’s name be moved to ‘present’ and John Mann’s name be removed from the minutes.

    ii.        That the phrase ‘err on the side of caution’ in the final paragraph of page one be amended to read ‘exercise caution’.

None.

Fiona Ledden informed the Committee that this report was an important update on Members Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPIs). She reminded the Committee that, due to Localism Act 2011, there had now been a change to what interests Members must declare and how those interests should be declared.  By law Members now only have to declare their disclosable pecuniary interests. Although the legislation stated that this has to be done after an election, to aid transparency, the Council asked all Councillors to complete their DPI forms by August 2012. However, despite two reminders and help of the group offices, two forms remained outstanding and seven forms were still incomplete.

It was explained that one of the reasons that the party Whips had been invited to today’s meeting was to see if they would be willing to encourage their colleagues who had yet to complete the forms to do so. Fiona Ledden suggested that if the forms were not completed by April, then at the next Standard’s Committee in June the names of the Councillors who had yet to successfully complete their forms should be released. She added that she welcomed any suggestions from the Committee on how best to ensure all forms were completed and the time scale they should be given for completion.

Fiona Ledden then concluded by highlighting the table on page eight of the report, which identified the gifts and hospitality that Councillors had declared. Although this was no longer required by law, the Council still advise Councillors to list gifts they had received to aid transparency.

In response to a number of questions raised, it was first clarified that previously Councillors had to declare information about a wider group of people. However, under the Localism Act, Councillors now only had to declare on the register the DPI of their significant partner or person they were co habiting with. It was then agreed that prior to the Localism Act there had been more clarity about what Councillors needed to declare. It was explained that other than DPIs it was now only a recommendation that Councillors still declare any relevant personal interests. Fiona Ledden reminded Councillors to always consider how the reasonable person would view the situation if a Councillor did not disclose a relevant personal interest. It was added that it would always be best to exercise caution and be as transparent as possible. Fiona Ledden stated that she would be very happy to conduct some training in regards to this, and provide Councillors with tangible examples to make it easier to understand.

In regards to the DPI forms the Committee were unsure if the group offices had informed the individual members that their forms had not been completed. If this had not been done it was agreed that this would be very helpful as Councillors may be unaware if their form had not been completed correctly.

Both Fiona Ledden and Kathy Robinson clarified for Members that if they were to use Council resources then it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Fiona Ledden stated that this report had been written to establish how the Standards Committee could ensure that high standards were maintained by all members, despite the lack of sanctions available in the new legislation. One way that had been agreed at the previous Standards Committee was to involve the party Whips and that was why they had been invited to attend this meeting. Fiona Ledden added that she was open to any other ideas that the Committee had at how to make compliance with the Code of Conduct more robust.

In response to a number of questions by the Committee Fiona Ledden explained that it would be possible for any Councillor or any member of the public to make a complaint in writing to the Monitoring Officer. This included in email form as a handwritten signature was not required but the Monitoring Officer would not generally accept anonymous complaints. Fiona Ledden again stated that she would be happy to provide training for Councillors on the Code of Conduct and the sanctions for contravening it. She reiterated that there were not many formal sanctions prescribed by Law any more but as long as there was a consistent, serious approach to dealing with those who breached the Code of Conduct then that should help promote good behaviour. It was agreed that there were advantages to the new system, such as Councillors not being able to use the Standards regime for their own political gains. However it was acknowledged that the lack of sanctions could prove problematic. The committee agreed that having the group Whips at the meeting was very helpful and that they should be invited to all Standards Committee and be included in the distribution for papers.

When asked whether the Monitoring Officer would consult the Whip or the Independent Person first regarding a complainant, it was stated that it would depend on the circumstances and the type of complainant. For example if the complainant related to the leader of the group or the whip then the Monitoring Officer would consult the Independent Person first. If it were a minor matter that could be resolved with the Whip without wasting the Independent Persons time then Whip would be consulted first. It was then explained that the Monitoring Officer would inform the Standards Committee, in annual report, of all the complaints they had received, including those that had not been referred to the Committee. It was added that the Monitoring Officer was keen to make the process as open and transparent as possible.

Fiona Ledden then clarified that it would be a balancing act between the cost of any investigation and the public interest in that investigation. She stated that cost would not be an automatic bar to investigation if there was a substantial public interest.

Fiona Ledden agreed that social media was a complicated area. For example it would be expected that the Leader of the Council would have a blog on the Council’s website and that that blog would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The date of the next meeting of the Committee will be confirmed after the annual Council meeting scheduled for 15 May 2013.

The date of the next meeting of the Committee will be confirmed after the annual Council meeting scheduled for 15 May 2013.

None.