Agenda item

(To receive a report which provides the Committee with an update on the work undertaken in relation to the standards regime of the Council)

Consideration was given to a report which updated the Committee on work which had been undertaken in relation to the standards regime of the Council.

Members were advised that the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee had commenced a full review of the Constitution over a year ago, and had established a cross party Constitutional Review Working Group.  It was hoped that the work would be concluded shortly and the final parts for approval would be going to Council in December 2014.

Members were advised that initial discussion had determined that there was a need for the Members Code of Conduct to be revised, but it was noted that the current version did achieve the requirements of the Localism Act.  However, it had less explanation than the LGA's model code.  It was reported that on 1 July 2012 the Standards Regime was changed under the Localism Act as it was felt that the previous legislation was no longer fit for purpose.  The national system was abandoned as a result of this and Councils were required to introduce their own local standards code and protocols.  This authority opted for a more streamlined code and no Standards Committee.

The Committee was provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         Advice to members if they had concerns regarding declaring interests was always to over declare rather than to under declare;

·         Under the new arrangements, once it had been concluded that there had been a breach of the Code of Conduct, the Audit Committee would need to convene a sub-group which would determine what action was to be taken;

·         It was important to note that it was not the role of officers to judge members in relation to breaches of the Code of Conduct, and councillors should be the ones who judge their peers;

·         It was noted that all authorities had their own way of dealing with standards issues, some had kept a standards committee whilst others had abolished them;

·         It was queried how it would be monitored whether interests were not being declared.  Members were advised that officers would not police councillors to ensure they were declaring everything they needed to, as the Code of Conduct required members to be responsible for their own declarations.  However, members were periodically reminded that there was a need to update their interest forms if their situations changed;

·         It was thought that a system whereby members could update their forms online would be useful, and a more database based approach which could be interrogated more easily was being considered;

·         It was also suggested that the forms that members were required to complete could be redesigned as they did not always promote the right response;

·         Members commented that they also found it useful that there was someone within Democratic Services that they could go to when they needed to update their interests form;

·         It was commented that there was a need for a sensible approach in relation to the declaration of gifts and hospitality by both officers and members, and that only items over a certain amount should be declared.  Members were advised that it was recommended that officers declare anything with a value of £25 and above, and it was noted that it should also be recorded if hospitality was refused.  However, it was noted that a lot of the gifts were genuine and given to frontline staff;

·         It could be guaranteed that the media would look at both Councillors declarations of interest and expenses claims;

·         Generally, the Monitoring Officer would be dealing with 3-4 cases of an alleged breach of the Code of Conduct at any one time;

·         The existing Members Code of Conduct was constructed on the principles that an elected member should not use public office for their personal gain.  It needed to be considered whether member behaviour should be part of the Code of Conduct;

·         It was noted that the Monitoring Officer dealt with all reports of breaches of the code of conduct as confidential, and it was uncertain what purpose it would serve if the number of reports received was to be reported this Committee.

RESOLVED

            That the content of the report be noted.