Agenda item

To consider the attached report.

Contact Officer:  Glenn Watson

The Committee received the Annual Review of the Code of Conduct and Complaints procedure. The Committee had oversight of Member Code of Conduct Complaints both for this Council and for parish and town councils. The report provided an annual review of the complaints received during 2021/22 and of the effectiveness of the arrangements for handling them. The report addressed concerns and queries raised by the Committee during the year, which included greater transparency about the timeliness and nature of member code of conduct complaints.

The following points were made by the Principal Governance Officer:-

·         The Committee noted in the Autumn that complaints had not always moved on, during the year, as swiftly as envisaged within the procedures. Partly this was due to resourcing, which was supplemented early in the New Year. It was also noted that the earliest stages of the process were important. There was an essential element of information exchange at these stages: clarifying the complaint, ensuring that the person complained about had an opportunity to respond; and the complainant then being asked if they were satisfied or not.

·         Only one breach of the Code was formally found; and the average time taken to complete a case was as follows; average time taken for Buckinghamshire councillors (7 complaints 0 breaches) - 2.5 weeks, and for Parish/Town councillors (27 complaints, 1 breach) -5 weeks

·         Other than one town council complaint (raised by seven complainants), which reached Stage 3, all other complaints were concluded at either Initial Assessment or Stage 1.

·         The most alleged breach was against the principle of ‘Respect’; that a councillor failed to demonstrate respect to an individual or to the community. When looking at information provided by the Standards of Public Life Committee 83-85% of Councils which had complaints said that at least one or two of those had been about the principle of respect in the January 2019 report. The Local Government Association (LGA) guidance stated that respect could be quite subjective. The next largest trigger for a complaint had been a concern about member interests.

·         Only eight complaints were currently live, all relating to parish and town councils. Seven of these allegations related to one parish councillor, over four separate matters. They were being taken together and were currently at Stage 2. The eighth was an outstanding matter from 2021/22 which would shortly be concluded within Stage 1.

·         Comparatively, the LGA guidance indicated a target of 10 days for Stage 1 and 5 days to review the comments of the subject member. Buckinghamshire Council’s target was 20 days to enable a thorough engagement in the first stage of the investigation although this was balanced against the need to be swift as a complaint can be damaging to the reputation of the subject member. It was important that procedures were proportionate. Officers therefore intended to carry out a benchmarking exercise against a range of other authorities’ procedures to identify if there were changes that could be made to timeframes or the approach generally. The outcome of that review would be reported to the next meeting of the Committee.

·         Given the number of complaints relating to parish and town councils, the Monitoring Officer would also be liaising with the Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Association of Local Councils to explore what training could usefully be offered to members of parish and town councils, and their clerks, about code of conduct matters.

During discussion Members made the following points:-

·         The Chairman put on record his thanks to officers for dealing with the issues raised by Members at previous meetings.

·         A Member expressed concern that Buckinghamshire Council bore the cost of investigations and hearings and that parish and town councils should be made more aware of this and provide good training to avoid complaints being raised in the first place. He also commented that some complaints could be related to personality clashes. The Service Director Legal and Democratic Services said that he would be liaising with parish and town councils about what training should be provided, including providing bespoke training where required.

·         A Member suggested that further detail should be provided about the nature of each complaint (without breaching confidence) and the source of it (e.g. member of the public, councillor or staff) to gain a better understanding of the root causes. Concern was also expressed about the lack of a specific timescale for the initial triaging assessment.

·         The Principal Governance Officer reported that 17 of the complaints were made by councillors which was a significant percentage. The benchmarking exercise would provide useful background to a review of timescales.

·         The Service Director Legal and Democratic Services reported that it was important to respect confidentiality although the complaint could be made public at stage 3

·         It was considered that it would be helpful to have some comparative information over previous years to identify whether processes were improving.

·         A suggestion was made that regular training should be given to town and parish councils as councillors, clerks and policies changed. In addition it was difficult to mention locations as many parish councils were quite small and it would make it easy to identify individuals. The first stage of the investigation should be thorough with reasonable timescales to avoid moving into Stage 2.

·         With reference to 2.18 of the report Members noted that not all Parish and Town Councils were members of the Bucks and Milton Keynes Association of Local Councils therefore training should also be offered through the Society of Local Council Clerks. The Member also expressed concern about respect in the Council Chamber and suggested it would be helpful to have further training on this. The Service Director Legal and Democratic Services reported that regular training was given to parish and town clerks and also bespoke training was offered to those Council who were not affiliated with BMKALC. Annual refresher training would be given for unitary councillors after the Annual Council in May which would include code of conduct training. The Chairman reported that robust and vigorous debate was expected in the Council chamber which was managed by the Chairman who would intervene if any Members were disrespectful.

·         In response to a question as to whether parish and town councils should have their own policy to deal with complaints, the Service Director responded that the Localism Act 2011 stated that the upper tier authorities should deal with the code of conduct and complaints. In terms of getting parish and town councils to deal with the complaint in the first instance where relevant the Council had sometimes put them in touch with mediators to help resolve issues such as a breakdown of relationships or personality clashes.

·         Clarity was given that the complaints reported at the meeting had been made from a number of sources including residents. Following this a Member commented that the number of complaints was quite low when looking at the number of parish,  town and unitary councillors in Buckinghamshire which demonstrated a robust system.

·         The process for making a complaint was on the website which included an online form https://www.buckinghamshire.gov.uk/your-council/contact-and-complaints/complain-about-councillor/. Council staff, Parish and town clerks would also give out the Monitoring Officer’s email address when requested.

·         A Member referred to Appendix 1 of the report and the instances where the Appendix referred to the Code principle of ‘Respect’ and then said either ‘No breach’ or ‘Not within Code’; the Member asked what this differentiation meant.

·         The Principal Governance Officer reported that those mentioning ‘Not within Code’ was an outcome of the initial triaging assessment; whereas those referring to ‘No breach’ indicated those which passed the triage but were then found not to have substance under the formal procedures.

·         A suggestion was made that it would be helpful to have a contact number where the complaint could be discussed in the first instance as an informal resolution to the complaint may be found earlier before a formal complaint was made. The Service Director Legal and Democratic Services reported that both he and the Principal Governance Officer did speak to people on the phone as part of an initial triage of complaints where appropriate.

·         It was confirmed that standards of dress for formal meetings would not ordinarily be a matter for the Code of Conduct; and that should this ever be necessary, it would be a matter of informal guidance, as had occurred when formal meetings were held solely online during the pandemic.

RESOLVED that the annual review of the Member Code of Conduct complaints for 2021/22 be noted including the proposed actions for 2022/23 regarding procedures, timeframes, and training (in paragraphs 2.17-2.18).