Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

The Clerk drew attention to the Emergency Evacuation Procedure.

Apologies were received from Cllr Eleanor Jackson (B&NES), Cllr Veronica Packham (Parish Representative), Cllr Tony Marwood (Parish Representative), Cllr Nick Stevens (Parish Representative).

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officer before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

There were none.

There was none.

There were none.

There were none.

To approve the minutes of the meeting of 21^st June 2012 as a correct record.

The minutes of the meeting of 21^st June 2012 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Standards Committee will consider the following issues:

a)  The progress of the implementation of the new Standards regime

b)  The suggested process for dealing with complaints against councillors

c)  The Register of Interests

d)  Parish and Town Councils

e)  The role of Independent Persons

f)  Transitional issues.

The Monitoring Officer, Vernon Hitchman, introduced the report.

Member training

He referred the Members to the issue of training in the new regime and proposed that 2-3 training sessions are held shortly for B&NES Members. The parish and town councils would need separate training. Cllr Nigel Roberts commented that it would be difficult to arrange training events for all 65 Members and suggested that a distance training model is rolled out using a ‘Frequently Asked Question’ model together with examples of unacceptable behaviour. The Members supported this proposal. The Chair asked whether there were any sanctions available to be used with Members who did not attend training and was informed that it was not a requirement, but that political group leaders would be asked to encourage Members to attend.

Chairing the Standards Committee

As a result of the changes in the statutory regime, it is no longer possible for co-opted independent members to have voting rights. However, the Committee had indicated that it valued their participation and wished their  membership to continue. The Monitoring Officer proposed that the Committee appoint one of the Councillor Members with voting rights as a Chair, but designate one of the independent members as ‘lead independent co-opted member’ who would have a role when it came to filtering and assessment of complaints. As the Committee has hitherto worked in a consensual manner, it is not envisaged that this would cause any problems. There followed some discussion about the necessity of avoiding political bias when nominating a chair e.g. the situation that might arise if the Chair was from the same party as the councillor who was the subject of the complaint. It was suggested that the chair could be elected on a rotating basis between the parties.  It was felt however, that it was preferable in terms of the public perception of the Committee, that the Chair was independent.

Complaints against Councillors

The Monitoring Officer referred the Members to the proposals as detailed in Appendix 1 to the report and drew their attention to the two suggested procedures (Procedure A and B) which could be adopted. After some discussion, the Members agreed that while serious or complex cases would need to be investigated, the less serious ones could be dealt with a lighter touch and more swiftly under Procedure B. The Monitoring Officer advised the Members that a judgement would have to be made as to the seriousness of the allegation and from that, whether it was necessary to hold a local hearing.

It was agreed that an individual mailbox was set up for complaints. It was also agreed that the 5 days for the Subject Member of a complaint should be extended to 10 days. It was further agreed that the Monitoring Officer could use his discretion regarding the timing where a Subject Member was on holiday or unwell.

There was further discussion about the progressing of a complaint after a Subject Member had resigned. It was agreed that in those cases the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

The Monitoring Officer updated the Members on the progress of outstanding complaints.