MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE STANDARDS COMMITTEE HELD AT COUNTY HALL, NEWPORT, ISLE OF WIGHT ON TUESDAY 17 JUNE 2003 COMMENCING AT 9.30 AM

 

Present :

 

Mr B Claxton (Chairman), Mr M J Cunningham, Mrs J Harding, Mr G Hibberd, Mr V Morey, Mr D Russell, Mr D Watson

 

Also present:  

 

Mr A Mundy

 

Apologies :

 

Mr R Mew, Mrs J Scott, Mr I Ward

 

1.                  MINUTES

 

RESOLVED :

 

            THAT the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 February 2003 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

 

2.                  ROLE OF MEMBERS AND TRAINING NEEDS

 

The Committee considered a report from the Monitoring Officer setting out the progress on the Role of Members (as agreed a the last meeting of the Committee) and various training initiatives that had been, or were about to be, undertaken on ethics and standards for Members.  The Chairman reported on the 2nd Annual Assembly of Standards Committee that had been held in Birmingham at which the first part of the Section 66 Regulations (dealing with matters being referred by Ethical Standards Officers back to the Standards Committee for determination of the relevant sanction) had been issued to delegates. It was suggested that the Committee would require training on the Regulations and how the hearings should be conducted prior to any hearing being considered by the Committee.

 

RESOLVED :

 

(a)          THAT the Committee notes the current and recent developments in Member training and that any further training needs arising from the ethical audit be considered at that time.

 

(b)          THAT prior to considering any matters referred to the Committee by the Ethical Standards Officer the Committee have training on the Regulations and the conduct of any meeting convened to consider such referrals.

 

3.                  ETHICAL AUDIT

 

The Committee considered a report by the Monitoring Officer setting out how an Ethical Audit of the Isle of Wight Council might be undertaken. It was suggested that such an audit be undertaken in three phases – the first a “desktop” exercise to establish what policies were available and how recently they have been reviewed; the second a questionnaire of Members and officers to measure their understanding of ethical issues within the Council; and the third a more in depth detailed searching mechanism that would rely on the outcome of the early two stages to identify areas that might need greater consideration. Consequently some of the detailed questions in phases 2 and 3 might be changed as a consequent of the work undertaken.

 

It was felt that each stage was not dependent on the completion of the previous stage and that the Committee, if it felt the need arose, to make specific investigations, or recommendations on areas as and when necessary.  The Monitoring Officer agreed to add a paragraph to the “preamble” of the Ethical Audit methodology to reflect this.

 

RESOLVED :

 

THAT subject to the detail amendment as set out above the methodology for an ethical audit as set out in the appendix to the Monitoring Officer’s report be approved and implemented and that a task group of the Chairman, Mr Hibbered, Mr Russell and Mr Watson oversee (and agree whatever action is necessary for a successful conclusion) the process with a view to completing Stage 1 by 30 September 2003, Stage 2 by 31 December 2003 and Stage 3 commenced in January 2004.

 

4.                  MEMBERS’ INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE ARRANGEMENTS

 

The Committee considered a report from the Monitoring Officer setting out the current arrangements for Members indemnity and insurance and suggesting ways that this cover might be extended to ensure maximum protection for Members whilst undertaking their official duties in a responsible manner.

 

It was noted that with regard to outside bodies the Resources Select Committee of the Council had commissioned some work to identify which outside bodies it would be appropriate for the Council to appoint to and what conditions should be attached to any such appointment.  A further report would be submitted back to this Committee once this work had been completed.

 

On the issue of extending the indemnity and insurance arrangements for Members the Committee considered that these should be slightly more restricted than recommended to ensure that the Council could (on the recommendation of this Committee on a case by case basis) not extend the indemnity when the circumstances justified it.

 

RESOLVED :

 

THAT the position with regards to the outside bodies be noted, and the Standards Committee receive such future reports as are necessary.

 

RESOLVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNCIL :

 

(a)          THAT the following policy be adopted with regards to Members indemnity in defending libel actions against Members:

 

(i)            That the Council may meet, in cases where the insurance cover for defending defamation cases applies, the percentage of uninsured costs or damages where it is advised it is legally able to do so, on a case by case basis.

 

(ii)          That no indemnity is offered to Members defending defamation cases where insurance cover does not apply.

 

(iii)        That indemnity for the costs of defamation proceedings brought by a Member will only be considered by the Council following receipt of legal advice sought and paid for by the Member concerned which advises there is a substantial defamation and good prospects of successful proceedings.

 

(iv)        That the Standards Committee make a recommendation in any case (including whether an excess should be applied) where funds are likely to be committed by the Council to indemnify a Member in any of the above circumstances.

 

(b)          THAT the Council adopt the following policy for the payment of a Member’s costs in defending themselves against an allegation to the Standards Board:

 

That the Council indemnifies Members for reasonable costs of defending themselves against a complaint to the Standards Board where:

 

(i)              The Member has been cleared of all or part of the allegation; and

 

(ii)            The Council is advised it is legally able to do so, on a case by case basis, and

 

(iii)             That the Standards Committee makes a recommendation in any case where funds are likely to be committed by the Council to indemnify a Member under this policy.

 

5.                  ROLE OF MONITORING OFFICER IN HANDLING A COMPLAINT

 

RESOLVED :

 

THAT it be noted that the publication of the Regulations by the Government was still awaited – it was anticipated that this would be in the autumn of 2003.

 

6.                  REVISED DRAFT CODE OF CONDUCT FOR COUNCILLORS AND OFFICERS DEALING WITH PLANNING MATTERS

 

 

 

RESOLVED :

 

THAT this matter be deferred until after it has been considered by the Development Control Committee in the autumn.

 

7.                  SUMMARY OF COMPLAINTS SUBMITTED TO THE STANDARDS BOARD FOR ENGLAND

 

The Committee received a report from the Monitoring Officer summarising the notifications that he had received from the Standards Board on various complaints that they had received.  The initial advice had been that this information should be private and confidential – however advice received the previous day had been that the report should be in the public domain but that the actual notices (with all the details in) from the Standards Board should be confidential and not for publication by virtue of Paragraph 14 Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

 

RESOLVED :

 

THAT the position be noted and that the report (but not the appendices) be made available to the public and press.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAIRMAN