Agenda item

To consider a revised process for considering Code of Conduct complaints.

The Committee considered a revised process for dealing with misconduct complaints against Councillors as set out on Agenda pages 37 to 52. 

Andrew Moulton, Head of Governance and Improvement Services and Mary Severin, Borough Solicitor presented the proposed revised process to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to Agenda pages 38 and 39 which summarised the changes and a number of specific questions to members of the Committee where its input was requested.  Andrew Moulton explained that the proposed amendments had been drafted with the objective of seeking continuous improvement in the Council’s process for misconduct complaints.

In discussion the following points were raised:

It was noted that a change was proposed to the process in the event that a Code of Conduct investigation concluded that there had been a breach of the Code of Conduct, (para 9.1.15 of the current process and para 9.1.14.2 of the proposed process).  Under the proposed process the name of the Councillor subject of the complaint would be published in the event that a decision was taken by the Monitoring Officer to seek an informal resolution of the complaint.  After discussion, the majority of the Committee felt that in those particular circumstances the name of the Councillor subject of the complaint should not be published and the existing process retained because the Councillor would have demonstrated good will in seeking to resolve the issue.  It was felt that to publish in this specific circumstance would unfairly risk the reputation of the Councillor.  Councillor Beth Rowland felt whilst she understood that point of view she felt that there was a need for a high degree of transparency and such information should be published.

A discussion also took place regarding the notification procedure to be followed after the receipt of a Code of Conduct complaint.  Councillor Pauline Helliar-Symons stated that she did not feel that it was fair or appropriate to notify a Councillor that a Code of Conduct complaint had been made against them until a decision had been made by the Monitoring Officer on whether further action should be taken.  Notification of the Councillor before the Monitoring Officer decision placed unnecessary distress on the Councillor.   However, the majority of the Committee felt that they felt that it was important for any Councillor subject of a complaint to be notified as soon as possible as they would wish to know about the complaint. It also allowed for the subject Councillor to give an initial response which provided the Monitoring Officer with more information to make their initial decision on whether to take further action regarding the complaint.

Mary Severin highlighted that within paragraph 9.1.16.3 of the new process there was specific reference that there was no right of appeal by a subject Councillor against a decision of the Monitoring Officer or a Hearings Panel.  Members of the Committee debated whether such a right of appeal should be added to the complaints process. A number of members of the Committee supported the creation of a process in principle if it could be a simple process and it was noted that the Royal Berkshire Fire Authority had an appeals mechanism for Councillors as part of its Code of Conduct complaints process.  Andrew Moulton commented that further work would need to be undertaken on this issue and that a further report could be presented to the next meeting of the Committee. 

RESOLVED: That further work be undertaken on the proposed revised process for the consideration of misconduct complaints.