Agenda item

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services

The Head of Legal Services introduced the report, focusing on the 15 “best practice” recommendations set out in the report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (CSPL). 

A Member asked about the scope of the Code of Conduct and in particular, how it would apply to the Council’s engagement with the private companies established to implement various aspects of the regeneration programme.  He was concerned about councillors’ accountability and the transparency of decision-making in these circumstances.  The Head of Legal Services advised that, in addition to the information publicly available about the companies in accordance with statutory requirements and Companies House registration, the Council itself could publish relevant information via its own website.

Another Member referred to the important role of the Independent Persons in the assessment of Code of Conduct complaints and asked whether there was a risk of a conflict of interest if an Independent Person had been involved in an initial assessment and was then participating in a formal hearing.  The Head of Legal Services confirmed that, in these circumstances, a different Independent Person would be invited to participate in the hearing.  Currently, there was provision for three Independent Persons with two in office, the third having resigned recently; recruitment of a replacement for this position would now take place and one of the recommendations in the report was the recruitment of a fourth.

The Member also asked about the timescales for notifying a councillor subject to a complaint of its content and detail.  The Head of Legal Services confirmed that the subject Member was provided with the information contained in a complaint at an early stage and invited to provide a response; the Member would also be provided with a draft report of any investigation into the complaint so that he or she could respond in writing before any hearing.  Dr Kirkland added that the subject Member also had a full opportunity at the hearing itself to respond to allegations and the investigator’s assessment.

A Member referred to the CSPL best practice recommendation that a councillor should be regarded as having breached a Code of Conduct if he or she refused to comply with any formal investigation process; the Member considered that this was at odds with the principle used in judicial proceedings that a defendant was not obliged to offer a defence with the onus being on the prosecution to demonstrate culpability.  The Head of Legal Services advised that the CSPL considered that this would be best practice, arguing that a councillor should engage positively in the process in recognition of their public service responsibilities, and had recommended that all local authorities therefore adopt it as part of their Codes of Conduct.  The Chair added that a court of law was often dealing with decisions affecting a person’s liberty and in view of that seriousness, it was understandable that different processes and rights would apply.  The Member who had raised the point was nevertheless uncomfortable with this best practice recommendation and considered that it should not be formally included in the Council’s Code of Conduct. 

In response to a question from a Member about the definition of bullying and harassment, the Head of Legal Services pointed to the definition proposed in the report (paragraph 3.2, best practice recommendation 1); she confirmed that this had been drafted by officers for the Committee’s consideration and for submission to full Council which would formally determine changes to the Code of Conduct.  The Member contrasted this proposal for a formal change to the wording of the Code with the approach to best practice recommendation 14 concerning the standards applying to “separate bodies” established by local authorities.  The Head of Legal Services advised that compliance with this recommendation would be achieved by publication on the Council’s website of information about such bodies, such as details of directorships, Board minutes, annual reports, etc

The Member suggested that the financial accounts of these separate bodies, such as those associated with the Council’s regeneration programme, should be reported to the Committee as a way of improving scrutiny and accountability.  The Head of Legal Services advised that the Committee’s terms of reference would need to be checked to determine whether this was part of its functions; the Head of Internal Audit suggested that the financial performance of the companies could be included in the Annual Governance Statement as proposed in the best practice recommendation (14) from the CSPL.  Another Member considered that there should be some formal proposal brought to the Committee on this issue.  The Chair proposed that officers should provide guidance on the mechanism for accountability of these separate bodies, send that guidance to the Chair of the Committee so the Committee could further discuss the matter; this was supported by the Committee.

In response to a Member’s question about the CSPL’s recommendation concerning new powers to suspend councillors found to have breached the Code of Conduct, the Head of Legal Services confirmed that such powers existed prior to the reforms brought in by the Localism Act 2011 and that their reintroduction would require amendments to legislation.

The Member also asked about the use of powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.  Officers outlined the arrangements for authorised Council officers to make decisions on the use of these powers which required endorsement by a Magistrate’s Court, and the circumstances of their use most recently, including the investigation of suspected abuses of Right-to-Buy legislation. 

In response to the Chair’s question about the number of Code of Conduct complaints received by the Council, the Head of Legal Services advised that they were generally low but had been higher than normal in the last year. 

RESOLVED:  That 

(1)          the Committee on Standards in Public Life report be noted;

(2)          steps be taken to introduce all the best practice recommendations set out in the Committee on Standards in Public Life report subject to, in relation to best practice recommendation 14, officers providing guidance on an appropriate mechanism for accountability of the separate bodies established by the Council, sending that guidance to the Chair; and

(3)          Members note the number of complaints about Members that have been received and the nil return of RIPA authorisation.