Return to Agenda

ITEM ST5

STANDARDS COMMITTEE – 1 DECEMBER 2006

BRIDGING THE GAP FIFTH ANNUAL ASSEMBLY OF STANDARDS COMMITTEES

Report by County Solicitor & Monitoring Officer

1. This report outlines the main issues discussed at this conference, held under the auspices of the Standards Board for England at the International Convention Centre, Birmingham on the 16 and 17 October 2006. The conference was attended by Mr. Roger Cowdrey, Deputy-Chairman of the Standards Committee, Peter Clark, Monitoring Officer, Derek Bishop, Deputy Monitoring Officer, Rachel Dunn, Democratic Involvement Officer and Deborah Miller, Principal Committee Officer.
2. The focus for this year was on working towards effective local regulations in light of the anticipated changes in role between the Standards Board and Standards Committees in dealing with local investigations and determination hearings. In addition, there was a strong emphasis on practical measures to raise the importance of ethical governance within Local Authorities.
3. This report will be supplemented by a PowerPoint presentation by those Members and Officers who attended the conference and in addition Members attention is also drawn to the fact that all course material and transcripts of speeches relating to the conference can be accessed on the Standards Board website or by direct link (www.annualassembly.co.uk).

The Role of the Standards Board for England

4. David Prince, Chief Executive, reported on the principal changes that are anticipated over the next 12 months, including the proposed legislative changes and introduction of the revised Code of Conduct, increased numbers of local investigations and implementation of a local filter rather than direct referral to the Standards Board. This latter point does have the largest implication for how Local Authorities can manage this process. He also raised the issue of embedding ethical behaviour as part of the culture of the Council.
5. Patricia Hughes, Deputy Chair of the Standards Board for England, provided some contextual information relating to the current work of the Standards Board and Local Authorities for the year 2005/06 3,836 complaints were received with 687 complaints being referred for investigation (22% of those received) resulting in 57 Standards Committee hearings nationally. 68% of cases were not being dealt with at a local level.
6. The presumption is that investigations should be handled locally unless there is a particular reason for this, for example the seriousness of the allegation or local conflicts of interest.
7. The Board’s perception is that whilst the vast majority of Standards Committee hearings are handled well with common sense outcomes, nevertheless, there were problem cases, particularly in relation to lack of cooperation from the Members involved and concerns in relation to procedure. Some 38% of appeals cite procedural irregularities as grounds of appeal. 34% of County, Unitary and Metropolitan Borough Councils had no local allegations whatsoever compared to fifteen percent of District Councils. There seems to be a disparity of a small handful of Authorities which was subject to a large number of complaints compared to many where there had been none whatsoever.
8. An indication was given that the local filtering of complaints whereby the Standards Committee will decide whether or not to investigate a particular complain instead of direct referral to the Standards Board. The anticipation is that, subject to legislation, this will be introduced in the Summer of 2007 and the system will be in operation by 2008,.
9. It is anticipated that the Standards Board will create a greater role with regards to support and guidance, particularly during the transition to the new system and with the implementation of the revised Code.
10. The new Code is anticipated to be in place in May 2007 and the importance of coordinating this to ensure that Members of more than one Authority are working to the new revised Code in both was emphasised. I think it is fair to say the people who attended the Conference were somewhat frustrated at the lack of having the full clear details of the revised Code so that preparations could be undertaken at an early stage.
11. The concern about Members not being able to speak about contentious matters or being advocates for local concerns was held by Ms Hughes to be caused by over cautious Monitoring Officer advice which was claimed to be at odds with the purpose of the Code. Unfortunately, Monitoring Officers have to provide advice on the Code as it is written, not how we would like it to be written.

Effective Ethical Environment

12. Professor Jerry Stoker from the Institute for Political and Economic Governance, University of Manchester, set out both the formal and informal enforcement of ethical governance within Authorities and challenged Conference members to ascertain whether their Standards Committees were lap dogs, watch dogs or guide dogs. Leadership was seen as playing an absolutely essential role with particular emphasis in relation to mediation being raised by a number of speakers at the Conference. Good ethical governance is seen as a key success factor for the Councils and directly linked to a Council’s performance.

Standards Committee: A National Snapshot

13. Members may be aware that a national survey was conducted with regards to the work of Standards Committees. Members may well have responded to this survey which was undertaken during July and August 2006. It presented a snapshot of the current position within England and looked at both the role of Monitoring Officers and the role of Members of Standards Committees. The findings of that report were presented to the Conference:-

• Most standards committee members serve on the committee for between one and five years, with just under a quarter serving for five years or more.
• When Standards Committees meet, (nearly all had met at least once since January 2005) the majority of monitoring officers surveyed said they attend these meetings.
• Key functions of standards committees include monitoring the effectiveness of the Code of Conduct, arranging training or seminars on the Code and being involved in local hearings.
• Recruitment of independent members is generally seen as neither easy nor difficult. Advertisements in newspapers are the most common method for recruiting independent members and are also seen to be the most effective.
• Half of all authorities surveyed have undertaken a local investigation in the past, most of who feel it was undertaken to an acceptable standard. However, four in five monitoring officers report experiencing problems in the investigation process.
• Raising awareness of Standards Committees within the authority is seen to be the key benefit of investigations. However, one third of monitoring officers who responded said that investigations can have a negative impact on the relationship between them and members.
• Most monitoring officers and Standards Committee members have received training in how to undertake a local investigation. However, almost two-thirds would like more training. Monitoring officers who responded to the survey reported that training on ethics and the Code of Conduct has been delivered in their authority, and that attendance by Standards Committee members has been fairly or very good.
• Most Standards Committee members have received training on how to undertake a local hearing, and training in relation to other aspects of their role. Whilst three-quarters of Standards Committee members said they felt well prepared for their involvement in local hearings, two-thirds would like additional training relevant to their role.
• Standards Committee members view their role positively, having good working relationships with their monitoring officer and receiving sufficient support from them.
• Three quarters of Standards Committee members expect their workload to increase in the future and over two thirds believe they will be able to cope with the changes.
• Monitoring officers are positive regarding: their working relationships, their role in the authority, resourcing, training, and support from their Chief Executive and the Chief Finance Officer.
• Expectations are that workloads will increase following the proposed changes set out in the consultation paper Standards of Conduct in English Local Government. Less than half of monitoring officers surveyed feel confident they are fully prepared for these changes.
• Most monitoring officers are aware of the Ethical Governance Toolkit. Over a quarter have used some of the materials and over half plan to use the toolkit in the future.

14. There is a clear intention to move from the Standards Board’s current position of filtering all complaints and deciding whether the matter should be investigated and if so whether it should be locally or by the Board itself.
15. There is a strong view that local decisions at the local level will assist in improving local ownership of the ethical framework with a clear message that this will be in place by next year.
16. The Government’s intention is that this will be a Standards Committee decision and not an Officer decision on whether or not a complaint is investigated and therefore, there will need to be consideration as to separate Sub-Committees dealing with referrals, appeals and investigations. A number of Conference members raised the practicalities of this because there is the concern that a Member being involved in the filter decision would not then be able to be deal with any subsequent investigation. One suggestion from the Board is whether Joint Committees might be the way forward where particularly District Councils may wish to get together to form a Panel to undertake this work.
17. Some difficulties were identified with regards to Standards Committees including:

• Difficulty in recruiting Independent Members
• Disillusionment among existing Independent Members
• Disparity of workloads between Committees
• Lack of consistency in local decision making
• Public perception that Committees lack independence

Case Reviews – Lessons Learnt So Far

18. This session was devoted to exploring in a little more detail cases that have been dealt with by the Standards Board and have involved interpretation of the Code on the following:

• Disrepute
• Disrespect
• Confidentiality
• Personal and Prejudicial Interests

19. Going through recent cases assisted in providing a real sense of how the Standards Board have dealt with these issues and provided an indication of the correct approach to sanctions that should be applied to proven breaches of the Code of Conduct. A summary of the cases referred to in this session form the basis of a separate report on the agenda.

Conducting an Effective Investigation

20. Practical guidance offered on the process by which an investigation should be conducted, including the need for the following:

• Investigation plan
• Evidence
• Interviews
• Evaluation
• Report checklist
• Specific reference was made to the Standards Board guidance on how to conduct an investigation

21. A case example was provided relating to the preliminary preparations and conduct of a hearing. A large number of procedural points and objections were raised as the basis for discussion.

Revised Code – Declaring Interests

22. Although there is no final version yet provided on the revised Code the expectation for the changes on the declarations of interest are as follows:

• Changes in personal interest definition
• Declaration changes for public service interest/charitable bodies and lobby groups and prejudicial interests
• Election on a single issue
• Membership of a lobby group that has stated views on a matter
• Specific exemptions that allow prejudicial interests to be treated as personal.

23. The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA)/Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers (SOLACE) Corporate Governance Framework was published in 2000 and an updated version has been sent out for formal consultation with an expectation that a new framework for the good governance standards within public services will be issued and form the basis of a CPA inspection. The framework on corporate governance is based on four dimensions:

• To provide a leadership forum within the community and engage in effective partnerships.
• To ensure delivery of high quality services whether directly in partnership or commissioning.
• Perform a stewardship role which protects the interests of local people and makes the best use of local resources.
• To develop local democracy and citizenship.

24. The issue of good governance becomes even more important with regards to the development of local strategic partnerships and local area agreements and, therefore, the framework foresees a wider role with regards to governance that is not just simply based on the County Council’s functions and responsibilities.
25. It is anticipated that an annual governance report will incorporate the current requirements for a Statement on Internal Control but with a wider remit relating to all four dimensions.

Issues of Independence

26. A really useful seminar on practical issues relating to appointment of Independent Members. Some Councils have struggled to appoint sufficient numbers of Independent Members and this was a useful session that went through the legislative background and appointment process. Guidance was also provided as to what should be regarded as essential and desirable attributes and how to go about recruitment proactively and successfully. A recruitment pack for the appointment of Independent Members was provided and will form the basis of the Council’s own attempts to appoint further Independent Members to the Committee.

Standards Committees – Raising Your Profile

27. There is general acceptance that a large number of Standards Committees have a low profile within Local Authorities particularly if the Council itself has not had to conduct a hearing. A useful template was provided relating to how the Committee could set objectives and target setting with an aim of raising its profile. A copy of this is annexed to this report for information (see Annex 1) (download as .pdf file).

  Working Proactively – The Role of the Standards Committees

28. Practical advice was provided by Members and Officers who sit on Standards Committees and gave a sense of issues that they have introduced to try and make Standards Committees more proactive. Clearly, advice to Members is a key component but also having a communications strategy and a work programme was cited as being particularly important. One practical tip was that Independent Members found it useful to observe Full Council and other Committees to see for themselves how Members behave towards each other. Reference was also made to the role that Standards Committee played in the overall corporate governance of the Council and cited the importance of the role of the Chief Executive and Leader visibly demonstrating their full support.

Conclusion

29. The Conference once more provided an opportunity for discussion and to learn from other colleagues as to improvements that can be made and to explore difficulties encountered in relation to the whole ethical governance agenda. It also provide a measure of assurance that this Standards Committee itself is operating effectively and to ensure that it is currently not missing an essential issue that is being dealt with more proactively by other Committees.

RECOMMENDATION

30. The Committee is RECOMMENDED to:

1. note the report;
2. consider whether there are any issues to be incorporated into the work programme for 2007/08.

PETER CLARK
County Solicitor & Monitoring Officer

Background Papers: Nil

Contact Officer: Peter Clark, County Solicitor & Monitoring Officer Tel: (01865) 815363

November 2006

Return to TOP