Agenda item

Dr Sexton, Chairman of the Standards Committee led the discussion and gave a quick summary of main points regarding the record of complaints received during the year and the decision made relating to them. During the presentation the Chairman made the following key points:

·  Overall Member behaviour is very good and acceptable;

·  There were some exceptions;

·  There were some risks largely relating to control of the council and the forthcoming Local Government Elections in May 2019. These two key issues may have implications for Member behaviour and the reputation of the Council;

·  The Chairman invited Members to conduct themselves to acceptable standards in order to minimise the risks;

·  Due to changes by government to standards schemes for managing Member behaviour, voluntary models were introduced and these relied heavily on voluntary compliance by Members to enforce acceptable Member behaviour;

·  Members had to be aware of the image as viewed from the public gallery during debates at council meetings

·  A review was currently underway and there was a related consultation which the Chairman would be responding to regarding code of cod;

·  Cross party training strategy adopted by the Council was good development;

·  Chairman supported the Council efforts to work towards the attainment Charter for Member Development;

·  The current approach for scheduling Standards Committee meetings was appropriate as meetings would only be convened when there was enough substantive business to consider, which business would be generated by the working party meeting first and recommending issues to Standards;

·  TDC support for town/parish councils - Tim Howes and Nick Hughes have been in discussions with parish/town representatives at Parish Forum regarding Member training;

·  Clarity was sought regarding the legal position for managing Parish/Town Councillors behaviour using the district council rules. However a recent case heard and determined elsewhere in the country confirmed that the District Council Standards’ determination of Parish/Town Councillor behaviour was binding and not debatable;

·  Standards Committee had during Chairman’s tenure tried to drive down the complaints about Member behaviour. However these had increased in the current municipal year;

·  The highest number of complaints related to Member use of the social media;

·  There was also a trend of Members complaints against each other;

·  There had been recently a regrettable trend in the social media of council officers being named;

·  Although there is a protocol for Member/Officer relations, this had not stopped one or two Members abusing some council officers;

·  This situation had generated more cynicism from the public;

·  The work of the Standards Sub Committees was not to make political judgements but to address issue relating to Member behaviour using the same rules as used elsewhere in the country;

·  However it was regrettable that a group chose to vote as a political group at the last Full Council despite the fact that a hearing had been set up and had agreed the recommendations on a case that was investigated by an outside independent investigator;

·  That formal investigation cost TDC about £3,500, which money the Council did not a budget for;

·  In one instance, forty complaints were received in relation to an incident. But upon considering the issue, the sub-committee found no breach in the code of conduct. Some members of the public were not satisfied with the outcome and complained to the Local Government Ombudsman. The office of the Ombudsman responded to the complaints and confirmed that the Council had indeed followed due process;

·  The Chairman thanked Members of the Standards Committee for the work done during the year.

In response to the presentation of the report by the Chairman, members of the Committee made the following comments:

·  The report was very thorough;

·  It was important for Members to take advice from the Monitoring Officer when handling member behaviour issues;

·  One of the worst part of unacceptable behaviour was the publication of officers’ private telephone numbers in the public domain;

·  Officers had a right to a private life;

·  Committee members thanked the Chairman for the work done during the year;

·  They acknowledged that the presentation was an honest and professional report;

·  One Member offered an explanation for the group conduct at Full Council;

·  Members of the group felt that they had been given clear and unequivocal guidance that the issue before Council on the night, was not to re-judge the case because the councillor had been found guilty and the punishment was being applied;

·  Members sought to understand the meaning of the word ‘censure’ as contained in the report;

·  There were a number of councillors who were asking on the night what they were voting for;

·  The group wanted to know whether the censure vote would mark the end of the matter or verbal remark going to be given to the Member during the meeting or whether a letter was going to be given thereafter;

·  The Member explained that the vote had nothing to do with a political decision;

·  The Member apologised to the Chairman of the Standards Committee for what transpired at Full Council.

·  The Member requested that in future, could the minutes of the meeting that was going to be subject of a council debate be forwarded to committee members prior to the council meeting;

In response to a Member suggestion highlighted above, Mr Howes advised the meeting that after each Standards Sub Committee hearing, all Members present at that hearing session would sign up to the decision made by that sub-committee.

Members agreed that signing up to each hearing decision was a good way forward.

Councillor Tomlinson proposed, Councillor Dexter seconded and Members agreed to accept the report.