Standards Committee Minutes

1. MINUTES

RESOLVED :

THAT the Minutes of the meeting held on 22 May 2006 be confirmed

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Interests were declared in the following matters:

Mr R Day declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Minute 3 – Dispensations as he was a member of Gurnard Parish Council.

3. URGENT BUSINESS – DISPENSATIONS

The Chairman agreed to an item of urgent business as a decision could not wait until the next meeting.

A request for dispensations had been received from Gurnard Parish Council, the dispensations had been sought as there was an expectation that the Parish Council would be inquorate at their meeting due to be held on 1 August 2006. Consideration was given to the applications and members were minded to allow the dispensation but only if the Parish Council was inquorate.

It was noted that Mrs Pain was a member of the WI whereby Mrs Worsfold was the President and members believed that if only one person could stay then the president should stand down first.

The Committee asked how many members were on Gurnard Parish Council and how many were needed to ensure they were quorate. It was considered that further information needed to be sought when a dispensation came before the Committee.

RESOLVED :

THAT the dispensations be allowed for the 1^st August 2006 meeting only and on the condition that they were only applicable if the Parish Council is actually inquorate.

4. REPORTS OF THE MONITORING OFFICER

(a) Monitoring Members’ Attendance

The Committee was told there was an amendment to page B-24 relating to Roger Mazillius, there should be three formal training sessions recorded.

Members believed the whole system was flawed owing to the different number of committee’s each councillor was on. It was easy to have a 100% attendance record if they only had 5 meetings to attend whereas some had up to 30, it did not show a true record of work undertaken.

It was noted that 26 councillors had not given any information on the hours spent on Outside Bodies even though all but 1 were appointed to them. The number of hours spent on constituency work was also blank in 24 cases.

The majority of councillors were working hard for the benefit of their constituents and there were all sorts of elements in a councillor’s service to the community which were not measurable. It was suggested that a press statement be released to the Isle of Wight County Press outlining the Committee’s thoughts.

RESOLVED :

THAT the following press statement be released :

We have received the analysis and on the whole although headline figures can give a distortion of real underlying effort nevertheless the majority of councillors are performing extremely well and their records are to be commended.

(b) The Committee’s Response to the ODPM Consultation

The Chairman reminded member’s that at the last meeting is was resolved to set up a sub committee to draft a response to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in relation to the White Paper. The sub committee had met and considered the responses received from several members of the committee. The final document reflected the committee’s collective views and a copy had also sent to the Standards Board for England. A letter of acknowledgement had been received. Members were advised that that was only the beginning of the process.

RESOLVED :

THAT the report be noted.

The Committee were advised that the Standards Board for England had asked the Council to undertake a local investigation. The Council were using a reciprocal arrangement with a Monitoring Officer of another Local Authority area who was assisting with the task. It was anticipated that a report would be ready within the next few days.

If the report concluded there was no breach to the Code of Conduct then it would be for the Standards Committee to decide at a meeting if they agreed with that finding. If they did agree then it should be arranged for a notice to be published giving the findings and the reasons for those findings. The member involved could ask that the notice not be passed to local newspapers. If however the committee disagreed with the findings of the report it would be up to the Standards Committee to decide if they felt there was case to answer. In that case a local hearing would have to be held to make a final determination as to whether the Code of Conduct had been breached.

Members asked about the three month deadline and were advised that was to make the report available. The report would be sent to the Standards Board for England, but it would be for the Standards Committee to decide whether they agreed with the findings of the report and to decide what would happen thereafter. If the Standards Committee decision was that a breach of the Code of Conduct has occurred it would be necessary to set up a hearing and that would need to be within three months of the report being published.

Members felt that if the Committee waited until September to look at the report there would only be a short time in which to look at it. They were advised the time would be short but adequate.

A further allegation had been received which concerned an allegation made in relation to a Parish Council. The matter had been referred for full consideration by an Ethical Standards Officer. The Ethical Standards Officer would in due course determine if the matter should be handled locally or centrally. It was for the Ethical Standards Officer to take conduct of the matter or to ask for the local Monitoring Officer to investigate the matter.

RESOLVED :

THAT the report be noted.

(d) Workplan for the forthcoming year

Members noted the workplan and indicated that the report in relation to the local hearing should be added to the 25 September 2006 meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED :

THAT a report relating to the local hearing be brought to 25 September 2006 Committee meeting.

CHAIRMAN