Visitors and members of the public who are unfamiliar with the building and procedures are advised that:

(a)      The fire alarm is a continuous loud ringing. In the event that a fire drill is planned during the meeting, the Chair will advise of this.

(b)      Exit routes from the chamber are located on each side of the room, one directly to a fire escape, the other to the stairs opposite the lifts.

(c)      In the event of the alarm sounding, leave the building via the nearest safe exit and gather at the assembly point on the far side of the car park. Do not leave the assembly point or re-enter the building until advised to do so. Do not use the lifts.

(d)      Anyone unable to use the stairs should make themselves known during this agenda item.

The Chair outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 February 2023 ( (Minute Nos. 624 - 628) and 17 May 2023   (Minute Nos. 33 - 34) as correct records.

The Minutes of the Meetings held on 1 February 2023 (Minute Nos. 624 – 628) and 17 May 2023 (Minute Nos. 33 – 34) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chair as correct records.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their families or friends.

The Chair will ask Members if they have any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) or disclosable non-pecuniary interests (DNPIs) to declare in respect of items on the agenda. Members with a DPI in an item must leave the room for that item and may not participate in the debate or vote. 

Aside from disclosable interests, where a fair-minded and informed observer would think there was a real possibility that a Member might be biased or predetermined on an item, the Member should declare this and leave the room while that item is considered.

Members who are in any doubt about interests, bias or predetermination should contact the monitoring officer for advice prior to the meeting.

No interests were declared.

The Monitoring Officer introduced the report which provided an overview of work during the period January 2023 to December 2023. He said that historically the Annual report was considered in Autumn, and he hoped to return to this programme of reporting in the future.

Members were invited to ask questions. A Member referred to the limited sanctions available if Members breached the code of conduct.  The Monitoring Officer advised that recommendations had previously been made to Government who had responded but had chosen not to increase sanctions and without changes in regulations, little could be achieved.  In the debate that followed, Councillor Angela Harrison proposed lobbying Government again for stronger sanctions and this was seconded by Councillor Karen Watson.  A Member suggested including both MPs in the letter.  Another Member suggested the Council’s position would be stronger if a motion was put to Full Council. 

There was a discussion around a Councillor’s liability, and independent advice and additional safeguarding. The Monitoring Officer said it did not fall within the remit of the Standards Committee and gave an example of a Councillor acting as a Trustee. A Member raised concerned that tougher sanctions might lead to an appeal and additional costs involved for legal advice.  Another Member suggested the Local Government Association could advise.

On being put to the vote Members agreed to write to the Secretary of State and the two local MP’s asking for the sanctions to be looked at again.

A Member referred to paragraph 4.1 on page 7 of the report and the Monitoring Officer clarified the Constitution set out the powers and duties to Committees and officers.  In the discussion that followed, the same Member raised issues over the lack of training and development on the Constitution, and he said that the previously cancelled Standards Committee could have been used to deliver this training.  A Member suggested this idea could be put forward to the Member Development Working Group (MDWG) as all Councillors, not just those that sat on the Standards Committee, would benefit from training on the Constitution. In response to a question, the Democratic and Electoral Services Manager advised that the MDWG had not met recently as the full programme of training for the first six months of the civic year had been set but the group were due to meet in early 2024 and the request would be raised.

Resolved:

(1)  That the reported be noted.

Before the report was introduced, a Member raised a point of order in respect of any background papers to support the report.  The Monitoring Officer advised no further documents were relied upon to write to the report.

The Monitoring Officer introduced the report, advising the policy had already been considered by the previous Standards Committee, the Executive Management Team (EMT), the Corporate Leadership Team (CLT), the Union and via a consultation with all staff. The response to the proposed policy was positive.

Members were invited to make comments which included:

·      Was there broad agreement that the policy should be accepted?;

·      the report was last considered by Committee in September 2022;

·      the report was one-sided, there was no mention of officers bullying Members and it was not ready;

·      the protocol was biased against Members and not officers; and

·      the policy had been discussed at length and should be in place now.

A Member said the outcome of the Peer Review had recommended improvements in officer/Member relationships and it was better to have the policy in place without further delays.

In response, the Monitoring Officer said there had been a level of feedback and there had been few suggested changes to the original policy agreed by the previous Standards Committee. This was not surprising as feedback is more commonly given on a policy already working in practice. He explained that under employment law, Members had a duty of care to officers. The Monitoring Officer added that Members were in the position of power over officers.  A Member said there was no position of power from Members over officers and there was equal respect between officers and Members. He suggested the policy needed looking at again. In response, a Member reminded the Committee that all Members, EMT, CLT and staff had been consulted and there had been no major disagreement. Another Member said that there were already consequences for officers as part of their contract.  The Monitoring Officer drew attention to paragraphs 2.11 and 2.12 which referred to the Member Code of Conduct and the Officer Code of Conduct.

A Member said Chairs and Vice-Chairs should be referred to as such and not Chairmen as stated in some pages of the policy. The same Member requested that ‘confidential’ be added in front of ‘…..information provided…’ on the first line of paragraph 5.8 of the policy.  The Monitoring Officer agreed to update the document with the suggested changes.

A Member considered that recommendation 2 was too broad and suggested including links to the LGA website to the policy.  He said that when the policy went to Full Council for adoption, more information on when, how and where the policy was discussed and the feedback received should be included.  In response to the comment in respect of recommendation 2, the Monitoring Officer said that purpose was in relation to what was discussed and agreed at this Standards Committee meeting. The Chair suggested a briefing be held before the policy was considered by Full Council.

There  ...  view the full minutes text for item 525.

The Monitoring Officer sought the Committee’s views on whether the Standards arrangements should be looked at so it was line with the Code of Conduct.

In proposing that the Standards arrangements were looked at by the Monitoring Officer, Councillor Harrison commented that new Members might not know it needed changing.  The proposal was seconded by Councillor Richard Palmer.  In response from a Member who questioned whether it should be considered by the Constitution Working Group, the Monitoring Officer advised that it was within the gift of the Standards Committee.

On being put to the vote, Members voted in favour.

Resolved:

(1)  That the Monitoring Officer considers the current standards arrangements and reports back to the Standards Committee.

There was a discussion on the need for Standards Committee training, particularly those that might sit on the Standards Hearing sub-committees. A Member suggested training on the complaints policy and vexatious complaints. The Monitoring Officer agreed to look at this.

A Member asked whether Standards Hearing sub-committee training could be opened up to all Members as Committees did change? The Chair spoke in support of all Members being invited to the training.  A Member commented that it would also be useful for any Members on the other side of the panel to attend training.

A Member suggested the introduction of Standards champions in individual political groups, to help with internal conflict resolution. The Monitoring Officer agreed to look at this.