Agenda item

a)    Attached at Appendix B1 is a colour copy of the flowchart explaining how complaints about Member conduct are dealt with.  The Committee is recommended to note this.

b)    The Monitoring Officer was asked by the Standards Committee at its last meeting to revisit the range of sanctions available to it under the new “Arrangements” following the investigation of member misconduct.  This has been done and is attached at Appendix B2.  The Committee is recommended to receive and consider the Monitoring Officer’s advice and to make any recommendations for changes to the “Arrangements” considered necessary.

The Monitoring Officer submitted a flowchart explaining how complaints about Councillors were dealt with.  From this, it was noted that the Monitoring Officer considered complaints in consultation with an Independent Person from the time the complaint was received.  This ensured that it was clear that the complaint was being dealt with objectively. 

It was stressed that Independent Persons were statutory advisers, not decision-makers.  As such, the Standards Advisory Board could decide to not accept their advice.  If this happened, the minutes of the meeting would need to record the advice and the Board’s reasons for departing from it.

The Monitoring Officer also reminded the Committee that it had asked at its last meeting that the Monitoring Officer revisit the range of sanctions available to the Committee under the new “Arrangements” following the investigation of member misconduct.  Advice on this was submitted to the Committee.

From this advice, the Committee noted that, if a letter of sanction was to be sent to a Councillor, the Chair of the relevant meeting of the Standards Advisory Board would, before the letter was sent, consult the Board members who had made the decision, so that the letter could be sent in the name of the Board.

It was suggested that Council could be asked to delegate powers to the Standards Committee to remove a Councillor from a committee on the recommendation of the Standards Advisory Board.  This would only apply to those appointments made by Council, but a report could be made to Council suggesting that the Standards Committee’s terms of reference be changed to permit this.

However, it was noted that a lot of appointments were not made by Council, so this course of action would not cover these.  For example, the Group Whip(s) would need to be contacted for appointments made by them.  This meant that the only course of action for ungrouped Members would be to obtain Council approval to their removal, which would lead to there being one regime for grouped Members and a different one for ungrouped.

In view of concerns about parity of treatment of grouped and ungrouped Members, it was suggested that a recommendation be made to Council that all Members be asked to agree that all removals from committees as a sanction be delegated to the Standards Committee, irrespective of who made the original appointment.

The Committee questioned how a sanction could be imposed.  For example, would a Councillor against whom sanctions had been recommended have a right to make representations to either the Standards Advisory Board and/or the Standards Committee?  the Monitoring Officer undertook to clarify this.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the flowchart explaining how complaints about Councillors were dealt with be noted; and

2)    That the Monitoring Officer be asked to clarify whether the power of sanction now lies with the Standards Advisory Board hearing a particular case, or with the Standards Committee.

RECOMMENDED:

That the power to remove any Councillor from a Committee as a sanction following a complaint made about that Councillor be delegated to the Standards Committee, to ensure parity of treatment of grouped and ungrouped Councillors.