BOROUGH OF POOLE
STANDARDS COMMITTEE
7th SEPTEMBER 2009
ANNUAL REPORT: REPORT OF THE HEAD OF LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES
EXPLANATORY NOTE
The Standards Committee at their last meeting considered the production of an Annual Report and requested that the Monitoring Officer produce a draft. This draft is set out below for Members consideration.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Borough of Poole has a Standards Committee as required by the Local Government Act 2000. In fact, the Borough established a Standards Committee on 9th October 2000 well in advance of the statutory requirement because it considered this to be good practice. In recent years the Committee has been given greater prominence due to the introduction of local complaints handling. As part of the Committee’s program to ensure that the public, Members and Officers are aware of its work, the Committee has produced this Annual Report for the Municipal Year 2008 to 2009 which draws together a number of different pieces of information relating to the work of the Committee and its operation.
2.0 BACKGROUND TO THE COMMITTEE’S WORK
2.1 The requirement for all Local Authorities (apart from Parish Councils) to establish their own Standards Committees was introduced by the Local Government Act 2000. There are specific requirements as to the membership of the Committees, and the provisions which apply to Poole are that at least 25% of the Members of the Committee should be independent Members, i.e. Members who are not elected Councillors or Officers of the Borough, and who are not politically affiliated. Legislation also requires the Committee to be chaired by one of the Independent Members.
2.2 So far as the Borough of Poole is concerned, the Committee is comprised of five Independent Members and two Councillors. Details of the Members of the Committee are given at Appendix 1 of this Report. The requirements as to the proportion of the Committee who are independent of the political groups represented on the Council is obviously met and exceeded in the case of Poole.
3.0 MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE
3.1 From the earliest days of the Borough of Poole Standards Committee, the Council took the decision that the Committee should be chaired by an Independent Member, even before this was a statutory requirement. The Chair for the Municipal Year to which this Report relates was Mr Phil Goodall who retired from the chair and from the Committee in May 2009 having completed six years service on the Committee.
3.2 The Council’s Constitution stipulates that Independent Members shall serve for a maximum of two terms of three years. Whilst the Borough has always been exceptionally lucky with the calibre of its Independent Members, it is recognised by those Members that it is possible over time to become part of the institution that they work with and it was felt therefore that six years should be a maximum for continuous service. There is nothing in theory to prevent Members applying again to join the Committee at some point in the future.
3.3 Due to the retirement in May 2009 of Mr Phil Goodall and Mr Brian Camfield, the former Chair and Vice Chair of the Committee, a public recruitment process was undertaken by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services. Advertisements were published in the Daily Echo, on the Council’s Web site, and were also sent to a significant number of community groups and Residents’ Associations. As a result, a good number of applications were received, and candidates were interviewed by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, Peter Pawlowski (Strategic Director), and Steve Cattle (Assistant Democratic Services Manager). As a result of the process, Mrs Lynda Bourne and Mr Andrew Reed were invited by the Council to join the Committee in May 2009.
3.4 At the same time, Mrs Penny Rogers and Mr Andrew Marsh were elected Chair and Vice Chair of the Committee respectively for the Municipal Year 2009 to 2010.
3.5 Two Councillors are appointed by Council to sit on the Standards Committee representing the two largest political groups. Councillor Neil Sorton and Councillor Graham Curtis were re-appointed to the Committee at Annual Council in May 2009.
4.0 TERMS OF REFERENCE
4.1 The Committee’s terms of reference are reproduced at Appendix 2 to this Report, and broadly speaking they can be summarised as being to promote and maintain high standards behaviour and ethical conduct by elected Members. The Committee also has a role in ensuring proper training in relation to such matters, advising the Council in relation to the adoption or revision of the Members’ Code of Conduct, monitoring the operation of the Code of Conduct, and considering any complaints that are made to it under the Council’s procedures for the local determination of complaints.
5.0 TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT AVAILABLE TO THE COMMITTEE
5.1 The Monitoring Officer is responsible for ensuring that Members of the Committee receive adequate training and development in order to discharge their role. The Monitoring Officer and the Chair of the Committee have attended the Standards Board for England Annual Assembly (Annual Conference) from time to time. No attendance was made in October 2008 as both Tim Martin and Phil Goodall had attended the previous year, and the programme did not appear to be sufficiently different. The current Chair and the Monitoring Officer are intending to attend the Annual Assembly in October 2009.
5.2 Members of the Standards Committee have been supported to attend external training courses in relation to complaints handling and to attend the local and regional meetings of the Independent Members’ network. The Dorset Independent Members’ Network is particularly active and is supported by the Dorset Councils Monitoring Officers. Where specific training is being delivered, then an invitation is extended to Councillor appointees to Standards Committees. These events are felt to be cost effective and useful training events.
6.0 COMPLAINTS HANDLING
6.1 Processes/Procedures
One of the key tasks of the Standards Committee is to deal with complaints that are submitted relating to alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct for elected Members. The Council has adopted a procedure for dealing with such complaints which is available on the Council’s Web site. A complaint form is also available on the Web site, and information articles have appeared from time to time in Poole News informing the public about this function of the Standards Committee.
6.2 The Council has also adopted assessment criteria to assist the Committee in considering whether complaints should be accepted for investigation and the Committee has adopted a practice of following the Standards Board for England model procedure for any Hearings that take place.
6.3 What the Law Requires
Any elected Member, Officer, or member of the public may lodge a complaint that another Member of the Council has failed to observe the provisions of the Code of Conduct for elected Members. If such a complaint is received, the Standards Committee Regulations require an Assessment Sub-Committee to be convened to consider whether the complaint should be investigated. These Sub-Committees are effectively administrative in character and do not meet in public. They are comprised of three Members of the Council’s Standards Committee, two Independent Members and a Member not from the same political group as the Councillor complained of. The Regulations require the Sub-Committees to be chaired by an Independent Member and to have at least one Councillor Member present. The Assessment Sub-Committees do not investigate complaints, but consider whether they merit being referred for investigation in the light of the Council’s Assessment criteria. The Assessment Sub-Committee can reach one of the following three decisions. It can:
· Refer the allegation to the Monitoring Officer of the Authority concerned.
· In exceptional cases, refer the allegation to the Standards Board for England.
· Decide that no action should be taken in respect of the allegation.
6.4 A further option exists, namely where complaints are not considered to be sufficiently serious to warrant investigation, or where investigation is not considered to be an appropriate step the Sub-Committee may refer the matter to the Monitoring Officer for what is called ‘alternative action’. This could involve discussion with the Member concerned, conciliation or mediation, or some other form of action falling short of full investigation.
6.5 There appears to be a misconception with regard to how some Members understand this process. The Regulations clearly require all complaints that are properly received by the Monitoring Officer to be put before the Assessment Sub-Committee. The Monitoring Officer cannot carry out prior investigation or use any discretion in deciding how to deal with such complaints. Similarly, the Monitoring Officer has no discretion not to put a valid complaint before the Assessment Sub-Committee for any reason.
6.6 Once the Assessment Sub-Committee has taken place, then the results will be implemented, and if the matter is referred for investigation, then an Investigating Officer will be appointed. If no further action is to be taken, this will be communicated to the complainant. The Complainant has the right to request a review of the decision and where this is asked for a fresh group of Members will form a Review Sub-Committee to look at the matter again.
6.7 Statistics
For the Municipal Year May 08- May 09
COMPLAINTS
/ ASSESSMENT SUB-COMMITTEE / NO FURTHER ACTION / REFERRED FOR INVESTIGATION /TOTAL
6 / 6 / 4 / 2 / 6Notes
Referred to SBE / 1Referred back from SBE / 1
Request for Review / 1 (original decision upheld)
Final Hearing / 1
Application for leave to Appeal to APE / 1 (refused)
Outstanding / 1
For the Current Municipal Year
COMPLAINTS
/ ASSESSMENT SUB-COMMITTEE / NO FURTHER ACTION / REFERRED FOR INVESTIGATION /TOTAL
2 / 2 / 0 / 2 / 2Notes
Referred to SBEReferred back from SBE
Request for Review
Final Hearing
Application for leave to Appeal to APE
Outstanding / 3
6.8 Trends and Issues
The majority of complaints that have been received relate to inter-Member behaviour. It is still quite early to be able to draw out themes or trends, but it would seem that if the pattern of complaints continues to relate mainly to interpersonal issues, then perhaps some more training on these matters should be arranged.
6.9 The Standards Committee would remind all Members of the Member:Member Protocol which deals with these issues.
6.10 Obviously, these are difficult and sensitive areas, and it is sometimes difficult to achieve objective standards in relation to behaviour due to people’s different outlooks. The Committee is keen to set benchmarks of acceptable behaviour which may assist future assessments when complaints are made. Nevertheless, each case is considered on its own merits.
7.0 ROLE OF THE STANDARDS BOARD FOR ENGLAND
7.1 Following changes to the complaints handling process and the transfer of complaints handling to Local Authorities, the Standards Board for England now exists as a strategic regulator only dealing in practical terms with the most serious of investigations. The Standards Board for England will consider dealing with complaints where they are so serious that if proven, they may exceed the powers of local Standards Committees to impose an appropriate penalty and/or where the position of the Member complained about is such that it would be difficult for local Committees to deal with matters.
7.2 As part of its role as a regulator, the Standards Board collects statistics from Local Authorities to ensure that the local complaints handling framework is being delivered properly across the country and that systems and processes are in place to ensure adherence with legislation.
7.3 The Standards Board for England also publishes guidance and bulletins to assist Members and Standards Committees in discharging their respective roles.
8.0 CONCLUSIONS
8.1 The Borough of Poole Standards Committee has successfully positioned itself to be able to deal with the challenges posed by the emergence of the local complaints handling framework. The level and nature of complaints dealt with to date have been relatively low, but the Committee have discharged their duties in a robust and professional manner.
8.2 This year has seen the departure of two of our experienced and long serving Independent Members; Mr Phil Goodall and Mr Brian Camfield, who latterly served as the Committee’s Chair and Vice Chair respectively. The Committee would like to thank Mr Goodall and Mr Camfield for their work for the Committee over the last six years and for their support for the ethical framework in the Borough of Poole. The Committee now moves forward to continue the positive start made in this new phase of its operation.
T M Martin
Head of Legal and Democratic Services
Penny Rogers
Independent Chair, BoP Standards Committee
10th August 2009
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Biographies
Terms of Reference
Mrs Penny Rogers – Chair of the Standards Committee
Born in Rochester Kent, Penny attended College attaining 6 GCE 'A' levels and secretarial qualifications of 120 wpm shorthand and 60wpm typing.
Employed in London by The Wellcome Foundation as Secretary/Chauffeuse to the Chairman, Dr. Fred Wrigley, in 1966, she has always held Board level pa positions.
Penny moved to Poole 1971 to Canford Heath and is active in school PTA and various local groups fund raising, committee members etc.
l982 onwards in Financial Services ultimately obtaining FPC I, II, and III, G.60, C-MAP etc. Penny set up and ran her own Independent Financial Consultancy in 1992 together with an Estate Agency in Broadstone - closed business in 2001 due to double hip replacement.
Since then Penny has been occupied as credit controller on self employed basis and maintained her consumer credit licence - she is now enjoying participation in Standards Committee for Poole and looking forward to future challenges!
Andrew Marsh – Vice Chairman of the Standards Committee
Andrew has worked in the UK Insurance market for the last 20 years and has a background in risk assessment and product development. Laterly he has developed a series of counter fraud measures for a local insurer and is currently working on technical developments within the fast growing Aggregator marketplace (involving the likes of Moneysupermarket, Confused, Go Compare and that dratted Meerkat). Andrew also co-owns a small local business making bespoke gifts, which he runs with his wife (www.albumania.com).