Standards Committee - 5 June 2007

Present at the Meeting:

Elected Members

• Councillor Mrs S Dewhurst
• Councillor B J Fagan
• Councillor J A O’Neil
• Councillor P Thompson
• Councillor Mrs J Prescott
• Councillor R Winkworth

Independent Members

• Mr G Wood (Chairman)
• Mr D A Lea
• Mr R Kidd

Mrs P Wheal

Parish Council Members

• Mr J Ball (Shevington)
• Mrs M A Thompson (Haigh)

1. Welcome to New Members : On behalf of the Committee, the Chairman extended a warm welcome to Councillor Mrs J Prescott.

2. Apologies for Absence: Apologies for absence were received from Councillor F B Walker.

3. Minutes : The Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 10 May 2007 were approved as a correct record.

4. Exclusion of the Public - Section 100a Local Government Act 1972: Resolved: The public is excluded from the meeting when the Committee discusses the following item for the reason set out below:-

Items not Subject to Confirmation by the Council

5. Appointment of Vice Chairman: Resolved: Councillor F B Walker is appointed Vice-Chairman of this Committee for the ensuing Municipal Year.

6. Adjudication Panel for England/Ethical Standards Officers Decisions: There were none.

7. Study into the operation and role of Standards Committee within local authorities: The Committee considered a report from the Standards Board for England, which informed Members of the operation and role of Standards Committees within local authorities.

The report summarised the results of a survey undertaken by the Standards Board for England into the arrangements within local authorities. The research had been undertaken following a change in legislation, which had resulted in local authorities becoming increasingly responsible to regulate the conduct of members within their authority.

Resolved:– The Committee notes the report now submitted.

8. Unreasonably persistent complainants: The Committee considered a report, which would also be considered by Cabinet that informed Members of the Local Government Ombudsman’s guidance on dealing with unreasonably persistent complainants. The report also invited Members to recommend amendments to the Council’s Corporate Complaints Policy, Procedure and Practice in respect of the guidance.

Resolved:– The Committee endorses the recommendations as set out in the report now submitted and requests the Director of Legal and Property Services to submit to the next meeting of the Committee a draft amendment to the protocol on Member/Officer relations.

9. Letter from the Standards Board for England: The Committee considered a letter from the Standards Board for England that had been sent to all Leaders of Councils, Chief Executives and Monitoring Officers.

The letter advised the Committee that the Standards Board was seeking the continuing assistance from local authorities in upholding high ethical standards. The Standards Board urged all local authorities, if they had not already done so, to adopt the revised Code of Conduct, to achieve the benefits for, and ensure consistent treatment of councillors nationally. The letter also stated that the Standards Committee and its Chair would be the lynchpin to the success of local handling and sought overt support of Council Leaders in establishing mature and constructive relationships, in which elected and independent members could work together to achieve a common goal of a robust local ethical framework.

Members were advised that the Standards Board would be working with the Department for Communities and Local Government and all sectors of local government to ensure that the new Code was clear as possible. Where necessary, the Standards Board would develop appropriate guidance and training materials to support local authorities in their new responsibilities.

The Director of Legal and Property Services agreed to provide the Committee with the responses from the Chief Executive and the Leader of the Council at its next meeting.

Resolved – The Committee notes the letter from the Standards Board now submitted.

10. Parish Issues: There were none.

11. Discussion Period: Resolved: (1) T he Committee notes the recent training issued to Members and Officers in relation to the adoption of the new Code of Conduct for Elected Members.

Resolved: (2) The Committee authorises the Director of Legal and Property Services to offer confidential informal mediation if in her view, such an offer may resolve an issue between Councillors.

12. Standards Board Decisions: (a) Case SBE 18084.07: The Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to an allegation that at a Member had failed to bring planning proposals to the attention of a township meeting in May 2005 and failed to declare a potential prejudicial interest in the matter.

The Referrals Unit noted that the township forum, which the complainant referred to, was not a meeting of the authority as defined by the Code of Conduct. Accordingly, it was not considered that the Members alleged conduct in this respect disclosed a potential failure to comply with the Code. The Standards Board for England decided that the allegation should not be referred to an ethical standards officer for investigation.

Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board did not believe that a potential breach of the Code of Conduct was disclosed. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(Councillor P Thompson declared a personal interest in this item as he was a neighbour of the Manager of Winstanley Warriors Junior Football Club. Mrs P A Wheal declared a personal interest in this item as she had attended two previous meetings of the Winstanley/Highfield Community Network).

(Councillor R Winkworth declared a prejudicial interest in this item because she was the subject of the case and left the meeting during consideration of this item).

(b) Case SBE18172.07: The Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to an allegation that at a Member had used the council’s resources for party political purposes, in particular the council’s email system and telephones. The complainant had provided a copy of a leaflet in support of the allegations and details from the council’s website.

T he Referrals Unit decided that the Standards Board for England recognised that it was not uncommon for councillors to send out newsletters to residents containing contact details, and publishing an email address in this fashion was not considered a potential breach of the Code of Conduct. In accordance with openness and transparency, there was an expectation that members of the public and local residents should have access to this information. Accordingly, it was not considered that council’s resources had been potentially misused for political purposes by details being published in this manner.

T he Standards Board for England decided that the allegation should not be referred to an ethical standards officer for investigation. Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board did not believe that a potential breach of the Code of Conduct was disclosed. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(c) Case SBE18173.07: T he Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to an allegation that at a Member had used the council’s resources for party political purposes, in particular the council’s email system and telephones. The complainant had provided a copy of a leaflet in support of the allegations and details from the council’s website.

T he Referrals Unit decided that the Standards Board for England recognised that it was not uncommon for councillors to send out newsletters to residents containing contact details, and publishing an email address in this fashion was not considered a potential breach of the Code of Conduct. In accordance with openness and transparency, there was an expectation that members of the public and local residents should have access to this information. Accordingly, it was not considered that council’s resources had been potentially misused for political purposes by details being published in this manner.

T he Standards Board for England decided that the allegation should not be referred to an ethical standards officer for investigation. Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board did not believe that a potential breach of the Code of Conduct was disclosed. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(d) Case SBE18254.07: The Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to three allegations:-

• A Member failed to declare a prejudicial interest in circumstances where a friend of a Councillor was an employee of a contractor listed for approval;
• Use of Authority resources to send out Christmas cards; and
• Failure to declare a friendship with a member of the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel.

In relation to allegation (1), t he Standards Board for England noted that the Member reportedly declared a personal interest in the meeting. Whilst it was recognised that the complainant considered that the member had a prejudicial interest, there was no information to suggest that this was the case. Furthermore, it was unclear as to what position the Members friend held within the organisation and to what extent he may be affected by the decision. In the absence of any substantive information, it was not considered that the alleged conduct disclosed a potential failure to comply with the Code of Practice.

In relation to allegation (2), the Standards Board for England decided that the information provided was insufficient to make a decision as to whether the complaint concerning the Members alleged misuse of the authority’s resources should be referred for investigation. In particular, it was noted that the complainant had not provided a copy of the card and envelope concerned, or an indication of how many others received the card, and therefore the resources used. It was stated that if this information was provided, the Standards Board would consider afresh whether the allegation should be referred for investigation, however, this should not be an indication of the decision the Standards Board may take.

In relation to allegation (3), the Standards Board for England acknowledged that members and independent members would know each other. In the circumstances, it was not considered that the alleged conduct disclosed a potential failure to comply with the Code.

T he Standards Board for England decided that the allegations should not be referred to an ethical standards officer for investigation. Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board did not believe that a potential breach of the Code of Conduct was disclosed. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(e) Case SBE 18253.07: T he Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to an allegation that at a council meeting on 6 September 2006, a Member stated that he had selected the chairman of the independent remuneration panel and also selected the entire panel. It was reported that at the meeting the Member voted in favour of the panel’s recommendation and failed to declare a relevant interest in selecting the panel.

The Standards Board did not consider that the Members alleged conduct at the meeting gave rise to a potential interest as defined by the Code of Conduct. Furthermore, there was no information to suggest that the Member’s interest in this matter was so significant that it would have potentially affected his judgement. The Standards Board for England decided that the allegations should not be referred to an ethical standards officer for investigation.

Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board did not believe that a potential breach of the Code of Conduct was disclosed. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(f) Case SBE 18253.07: T he Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to an allegation of a Members alleged conduct in relation to a recent planning application submitted by the complainant. The complainant reported the Member lived directly to the rear of her property. She reported that the decision appeared to be taking time and the complainant alleged that this may have been due to the Member writing to the authority querying some aspects of the application. It was further alleged that the complainant’s father had subsequently approached the member who had informed him that the planning application was “on his desk as he was a planning officer” and that he would be “making a decision” once he was satisfied about some aspects of the application. The complainant alleged that subsequently, a number of complaints had been received about her property and that planning and environmental health officers had inspected it several times. The complainant was of the view that the Member was improperly using his position as an elected member.

The Standards Board for England did not consider that the Member, acting in his private capacity, would be prevented from submitting complaints to the authority. It was acknowledged that , given the reported proximity of the members property to the application site, any interest in the matter would be likely to be prejudicial in nature. However, it was considered that further information was required in relation to the allegation that the member was involved with the consideration of the application in his official capacity as an elected member. If this information was provided, the Standards Board would consider afresh whether the matter should be referred for investigation, however, this should not be an indication of the decision the Standards Board may take.

Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board would not take any further action on this allegation until further information was received. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(g) Case SBE 17607.07: T he Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to an allegation that a member had failed to treat the complainant with respect. It was reported that the alleged incident occurred during a meeting of the Members political party. The complainant stated that the Members conduct became threatening and aggressive when requested to leave the meeting.

The Standards Board for England noted that the meeting of the political party was not a meeting of the authority. The information provided indicated that the Member may have been present at the meeting in his private capacity as opposed to his official capacity as an elected member. While it was noted that the complainant considered the alleged conduct threatening and disrespectful, officers considered that paragraph 2(b) of the Code of Conduct (failure to treat others with respect) would not apply in these circumstances. Furthermore, in light of a recent High Court decision the part of the code of conduct relating to disrepute only applied to member’s conduct when they were acting in their official capacity, carrying out the work of the authority, or using their position as a member.

The Standards Board for England decided that the allegations should not be referred to an ethical standards officer for investigation. Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board did not believe that a potential breach of the Code of Conduct was disclosed. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(h) Case SBE17577.07: Th e Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to an allegation that during a debate on post office closures at a meeting of the council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 12 February 2007, the Member used her position to order that the complainant should not be allowed to speak further. The complainant alleged that she had abused her position to unlawfully discriminate and confer a disadvantage on him.

The Standards Board for England determined that generally, it did not have jurisdiction over the rules for the conduct of local authority meetings, including who should be allowed to speak. The information provided suggested that the member had put the proposal not to allow the complainant to speak to the vote, which was carried. On the basis of the information provided it was not considered that the alleged conduct disclosed a potential failure to comply with the Code of Conduct. The Standards Board for England decided that the allegations should not be referred to an ethical standards officer for investigation. Having taken account of the available information, the Standards Board did not believe that a potential breach of the Code of Conduct was disclosed. The Standards Board made no finding of fact.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.