Standards Committee - 31 July 2007

Present at the Meeting

Elected Members

• Councillor B J Fagan
• Councillor J A O’Neil
• Councillor F B Walker
• Councillor R Winkworth

Independent Members

• Mr G Wood (Chairman)
• Mr D A Lea
• Mr G Pennington
• Mrs P Wheal

Parish Council Members

• Mrs M A Thomson (Haigh)

13. Welcome to New Members : The Chairman informed the Committee that Councillor R T Splaine had been appointed to the vacant position on the Standards Committee.

14. Apologies for Absence: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs S Dewhurst, Mrs J Prescott, R T Splaine and P Thompson, and Councillor J Ball (Shevington) and Mr R Kidd.

15. Minutes : The Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 5 June 2007 were approved as a correct record subject to the inclusion of Mr G Pennington within the attendance of the meeting.

16. 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

17. Adjudication Panel for England/Ethical Standards Officers Decisions: There was none.

18. Chief Executive’s response to the letter from the Standards Board for England: The Committee considered the response from the Chief Executive and the Leader of the Council in relation to the letter from the Standards Board for England, which had been sent to all Leaders of Councils, Chief Executives and Monitoring Officers (Minute 9 refers).

Resolved: The Committee notes the response now submitted.

19. Guidance for Members on gifts and hospitality: The Committee considered a report which had been considered by Cabinet (Minute 99 refers) on a protocol giving guidance to Members, Independent Members and Co-opted Members on their acceptance of gifts and hospitality, which was now a registerable and declarable interest under the code of conduct.

Resolved: The Committee endorses the recommendations as set out within the report and recommends the Council to adopt the protocol.

20. Local regulation: The Committee considered a report that outlined issues raised under local regulation contained within the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill. Members were advised that a new locally based system was to come into effect in April 2008. The new process would incorporate two new elements for local authorities:-

• receiving allegations; and
• reporting on performance to the Standards Board with possible intervention from them.

The Committee was informed that guidance from the Standards Board would be made available in early 2008, depending upon regulations that needed to be made. The report advised the Committee of some of the issues that they would need to consider and which the guidance may address, this included:-

• how to make the public aware of their right to complain. Should the Standards Committee issue a standard complaints form and include the topic on the Council’s web site;
• establish a process for handling allegations, how they are received how to notify the complainant and the Member concerned about the processes;
• how the Standards Committee will determine whether or not a breach of the code is disclosed and if so what, if anything, to do about it;
• If the Standards Committee concludes that there is no breach there will have to be a mechanism for the complainant to have that decision reconsidered.
• The Standards Committee will have a new power to direct the Monitoring Officer to take action other than investigation of a complaint, for example mediation or training;
• The Standards Board will require information from local authorities on case handling, how many complaints we received, how long it has taken us to deal with them, how many appeals we receive and what we do about them; and
• The Standards Board will have the power to intervene if it concludes that a local Standards Committee is failing.

The report further informed Members that the new proposals, contained within the new Bill, would enable the Secretary of State to make regulations under which two or more authorities may establish a joint Standards Committee. However, at this stage, it was not clear how this would work. Greater Manchester Monitoring Officers would be looking into this issue in the near future.

Resolved: (1) The Committee supports the principle of one or more Joint Standards Committees in Greater Manchester and instructs the Monitoring Officer to investigate this.

(2) The Committee requests the Monitoring Officer to report back to a future meeting of the Committee on the detailed implications of local regulations as soon as the situation is clearer.

21. Standards Board annual review: The Committee considered a report on the Standards Board for England’s annual review. The review advised Members on the changes to the ethical system and how the Standards Board for England was continuing to develop in their role as a strategic regulator, in order to support and guide local authorities.

Resolved: The Standards Committee notes the report.

22. 6th Annual Assembly of Standards Committees: The Committee was advised that the 6 th Annual Assembly of Standards Committees had been arranged for 15 and 16 October 2007. The Assembly would take place at the International Convention Centre in Birmingham.

The Committee was informed that five places had been allocated to Wigan Council, one for the Director of Legal and Property Services, one for the Chairman of the Standards Committee and three for other Member sof the Committee.

The Committee was advised that Councillor B J Fagan had given notice that he wished to be considered for one of the vacant places.

Resolved: (1) The Committee agrees that Councillor B J Fagan is allocated to one of the vacant places

(2) The Director of Legal and Property Services is delegated authority to fill the two remaining vacant places.

23. Parish issues (if any): There was none.

24. Discussion period: No issues were raised.

25. Standards Board decisions: (a) Case SBE 19097.07: The Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the above mentioned case. This related to an allegation that a Member had sent an email to the complainant, which breached a number of provisions of the Code of Conduct.

The Standards Board for England acknowledged that whilst the complainant was offended by the remarks contained within the email, it was not considered that they were such that had the potential to amount to a failure to comply with the Code of Conduct. In this respect, it was not considered that the comments were excessively rude or offensive and could be considered part of the general cut and thrust of politics. The Standards Board for England also considered that, as a fellow member, the complainant had at his disposal a platform from which to counter the comments, if he wished to do so.

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.

(b) Case SBE18875.07: The Committee considered the findings of the Referrals Unit for the Standards Board for England in the abovementioned case. This related to three allegations:-

1. 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;
2. Use of Authority resources to send out Christmas cards; and
3. Failure to declare a friendship with a member of the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel.

The Standards Board for England previously considered allegation (1) under reference SBE18254.07. It was considered that within his recent submission, the complainant had not provided any further information to substantiate his claim. Consequentially, on the basis of this information provided, no potential breach was considered to be disclosed by this allegation.

The Standards Board for England made an enquiry to the Authority regarding allegation (2). It was confirmed that the Christmas cards were sent in the Member’s capacity as Chairman with the full knowledge of the Authority and that this had been a well established practice for many years. The Standards Board for England considered that on the basis of the information provided, no potential breach of the Code of Conduct had been disclosed by this action.

In relation to allegation (3), The Standards Board for England noted that the complainant stated that one of the Independent Remuneration Panel Members declared a personal interest in that he was a friend of the Member. On this basis, it was considered that it would have been appropriate for the Member to also declare a personal interest on the same grounds. The Standards Board for England noted that Member’s allowances was one of several areas of discussion that was exempt from being considered as giving rise to a prejudicial interest on the part of Members who receive them.

The allegation that the Member failed to declare a personal interest was considered to disclose a potential breach of the Code of Conduct. However, the Standards Board for England had 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 the alleged conduct was serious enough to justify an investigation. The Standards Board made no finding of fact and no judgment had been made about whether the alleged events actually occurred in the way the complainant says in the absence of any investigation.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

(Councillor F B Walker declared a prejudicial interest in this item because he was the subject of the case and left the meeting during consideration of this item) .

(c) Case SBE18552.07: 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 prior to the recent local government elections, a Member had prepared an event using Council funds from the Brighter Borough Fund. The complainant alleged that the event was kept secret from other Councillors and, when advertised, was billed as a Labour Party initiative. The complainant also claimed that profits from the event had been donated to St. Peter’s Church, to which the Member belonged.

The complainant alleged that prior to the election period he spoke to the Member and made him aware of his concerns suggesting he sought advice before proceeding with the event. The complainant also stated that the issue was raised with the Council’s Monitoring Officer, who declined to take the case further. However, it was claimed that the Monitoring Officer had stated that a poster for the event was not acceptable and that the Member would have to pay for the poster himself.

The complainant expressed concern that the event had been advertised with explicit reference to the Labour Party and that political posters were displayed at the event. The complainant alleged that Council funds had been used to confer a political advantage and that the conduct constituted a misuse of Council resources for political purposes. The complainant noted that as he had lost the election by a very small majority, the alleged conduct had a significant impact on the result.

T he Standards Board for England noted the view reported by the Monitoring Officer, although it appeared that the Monitoring Officer considered that no further action was necessary. The Standards Board did not consider that the information provided supported a view that the event, itself, and the way in which it was funded was at variance with accepted Council procedure or that it disclosed a potential breach of the Code of Conduct.

The crux of the complaint appeared to be the reference in the promotional poster to a member of a particular political party presenting or hosting the event. However, there was no information as to how and where the poster was produced, the cost incurred, or whether the Member had agreed to refund these costs. Notwithstanding this, on balance, it was considered that this aspect of the allegation would not be of a sufficiently serious nature to warrant an investigation into the issue.

It was acknowledged that party political considerations were heightened during the election period. However, the Standards Board considered that the electorate were well versed in such issues and would be able to objectively weigh such considerations as part of the democratic process.

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 the alleged conduct was serious enough to justify an investigation. The Standards Board made no finding of fact and no judgment had been made about whether the alleged events actually occurred in the way the complainant says in the absence of any investigation.

Resolved: The Committee accepts the report.

26. Retirement of the Director of Legal and Property Services: The Chairman informed the Committee of the impending retirement of Mrs Susan Lowe, Director of Legal and Property Services, at the end of August 2007.

Resolved: The Committee expresses its t hanks for the advice, support and guidance Mrs Lowe had provided to the Committee in her role as Monitoring Officer and extends to her best thanks for her significant contribution to the Committee and best wishes for a long and healthy retirement.