PURPOSE

1. To inform the Committee of learning points to be incorporated into procedures as a result of the matter concerning Councillor Alan Wells.

BACKGROUND

2. At the meeting of the Standards Committee on the 30 January 2006, the Committee considered further submissions from Councillor Wells which had been prepared following the Appeal Hearing before the Adjudication Panel for England on the 6 January 2006. The Standards Committee undertook to determine whether learning points regarding procedures needed to be identified.

3. The Standards Committee concluded that there were ways in which the process could be improved.

4. The Monitoring Officer emphasised that in seeking to identify learning points for the future, the Standards Committee should not attempt to revisit the facts of this particular case as this task lay in the domain of the Adjudication Panel for England who had adjudicated upon the matter. The Standards Committee was asked to focus its attention on the learning points that followed from the process and any recommendations that could be made as to how such matters would be dealt with in future.

LEARNING POINTS IDENTIFIED

5. Bruce Claxton, the independent Chair of the Standards Committee, considered that there were elements of the investigation process employed by the Ethical Standards Officer which were not as thorough as they could have been. In particular, the issue as to whether the letter written by Councillor Wells to the Isle of Wight Council represented a preliminary view of Cowes Town Council or a final view. The Adjudication Panel for England found the letter to represent a preliminary view and they concluded that this could not amount to a breach of the Code of Conduct. The Standards Committee will impress upon all Town and Parish Councils the need to clearly identify the purpose of all written communications.

6. The Standards Committee had rigorously assessed the written evidence presented by the Ethical Standards Officer before proceeding to a local hearing and adopted a similarly rigorous approach in respect of the evidence heard at the local hearing. The members of the Adjudication Panel for England adopted a different approach in that they addressed their minds to their own question as to whether the letter represented a preliminary or definitive view of Cowes Town Council. The Standards Committee takes the view that had the Ethical Standards Officer specifically addressed the question of the purpose of the letter, then it would have specifically explored the same question.

7. During the course of the local hearing, it became clear that the written hearing procedure was not as comprehensive as it could have been, specifically Councillor Wells had to remind the Chairman of his right to cross examine a witness. This was rectified during the local hearing and no injustice occurred and the written procedure is being amended as a consequence.

8. At the local hearing the procedure for taking evidence under oath was inconsistent in that it became apparent that a witness currently giving evidence was not under oath and a decision was taken that it would be improper to administer the oath to subsequent witnesses. This had the effect of causing Councillor Wells to believe that the Standards Committee was placing greater weight on the oral evidence of the complainant than the oral evidence of the witnesses called by Councillor Wells. Whilst this was not the case, the impression conveyed was unassailable and the written procedures need to clearly state that all evidence will be given on oath. Whilst the guidance from the Standards Board for England in respect of local hearings does not stipulate that evidence should be given under oath, the Standards Committee consider this to reflect best practice.

9. It was the intention at the local hearing for the proceedings to be fully tape recorded and equipment was brought to the venue by the Isle of Wight Council for this purpose. Unfortunately, the equipment failed to function although it had been in full working order on the previous evening. All efforts were made to rectify the problem, but this proved impossible and it became necessary for a long hand note to be taken of the hearing. At any future hearing, steps must be taken to ensure that the recording equipment is in full working order prior to commencement.

10. The Standards Committee is committed to upholding high standards of conduct in public life and in discharging its duties and will continue to ensure that all procedures in respect of those duties will be subject of regular review and improvement where appropriate.

RECOMMENDATIONS

11. That the learning points identified in this report be adopted.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

Contact Point : Pat Szatter, F 823213 e-mail [email protected]

JOHN METCALFE

Acting Assistant Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer