Agenda item

Consideration was given to the updated presented by Jacqueline Collins, Monitoring Officer, which provided details on:-

1.         Phil Beavers, Independent Person and the Monitoring Officer, attended a meeting of the Parish Council on 21^st October, 2013 to discuss the current position with regard to the large number of complaints and the proposed way forward.  At that meeting the Parish Councillors re-newed their commitment to abide by the seven principles of public life (the Nolan principles) and to working actively to raise the standards of behaviour of Elected Members. 

A further training sessions was to be provided in December with the Parish Councillors by Phil Beavers, Independent Person, which having been deferred once should take place on Monday, 16^th December, 2013.

          When members of the public joined the meeting Phil Beavers explained the proposals for resolving the current difficulties and proposed, to which members of the public and Councillors agreed, to a voluntary moratoriumon the submission of fresh complaints whilst the current training was ongoing. Whilst complaints may still be submitted if they were considered to be of a similar nature to the complaints currently being resolved by way of informal  resolution, the Monitoring Officerhold them on file.

          Phil Beavers explained that he was hopeful that following the training the Parish Council would be able to move forward and conduct themselves in a manner appropriate to elected representatives.

          It was also noted that in September a further four complaints were received. These were referred to the Independent Person and were also to be dealt with by way of informal resolution.

          In addition, a complaint containing eleven allegations was received against a Parish Councillor, including bringing the Parish Council into disrepute, compromising impartiality, preventing access to information, gaining advantage for political purposes, breaching the equality duties and bullying.

          The Monitoring Officer determined that the allegations were both politically motivated and tit-for-tat and, therefore, in accordance with the Council’s assessment criteria, the complaints did not proceed.

          David Roper-Newman, Independent Person, also formed this view.  At the request of the complainant, David Roper-Newman and the Monitoring Officer, met with him and his legal representative to explain how this conclusion was reached.

(Councillor Gosling left the meeting at this point and did not participate on the debate relating to the following matter)

Councillor Sims assumed the Chair.

2.         A complaint that a Borough Councillor acted in a threatening manner and suggested that he could arrange for a parking ticket to be issued to a member of the public.

          Upon consideration it was concluded by the Monitoring Officer that the Councillor was not acting in his public capacity and, therefore, the Code of Conduct was not engaged.

          Phil Beavers, Independent Person, formed the same view.

          Discussion ensued on when an Elected Member was not acting on behalf of the Council and the Committee were advised about precedence set in court relating to the former Mayor of London, which set this out in detail.

(Councillor Gosling returned to the meeting at this point to continue with the following items)

Councillor Gosling in the Chair.

3.         A complaint that a Borough Councillor failed to pursue a matter on behalf of the complainant.

          The Monitoring Officer concluded that the Councillor had not breached any of the requirements of the Code of Conduct. Phil Beavers, Independent Person, considered the information and, independently, came to the same conclusion

4.         Various complaints regarding the completeness of the Register of Interests forms of the Borough Councillors.

          As a result of the complaint one Member added the description “none” to the section of the register relating to the interests of his spouse.

          The Monitoring Officer was satisfied that there was no breach of the Code of Conduct involved.

5.         A query regarding whether the attendance at an external event required registration as hospitality by the Mayor.

          The Monitoring Officer confirmed that as the event was accepted by the Mayor on behalf of the Borough and not in his private capacity, it did not require registration.

6.         A complaint that a Borough Councillor was rude to the complainant at a public event.

          Following discussion the Councillor issued an apology.

The Committee considered the detail made as part of the update and the actions taken, but sought clarification from the Monitoring Officer on the discharge of functions relating to the register of interests, use of social media in a personal/professional capacity and the need for training/advice in the completion of the Register of Interests form.

Resolved:-  That the report be received and the steps that have been taken with regard to referrals under the Code of Conduct be noted.