Agenda item

To consider the attached report.

Contact Officer:  Glenn Watson

The Committee received the report on the Annual Review of Member Code of Conduct Complaints. The report reviewed the Member Code of Conduct complaints received by Buckinghamshire Council and its parish and town councils in 2023/24. The report showed that 27 complaints were made against Buckinghamshire councillors and 23 against parish/town councillors, with only one breach of the Code found this being at the parish level. The report revealed that the most common alleged breach of the Code was disrespect, followed by alleged decision-making malpractice at the parish level. The majority of complaints came from the public, except for a third of parish/town complaints that came from fellow councillors or employees. In addition, there was some benchmarking information comparing the Council's experience of complaints with previous years and with other unitary authorities in the region. It also outlined the training activities delivered by the Council to promote and maintain good standards of conduct.

Members noted that there was an error in the first column in Annex 4 which should read as follows :-

Member Code of Conduct Complaints: Comparative – Unitary Authorities (numbers of complaints)

Bath and NE Somerset (59 councillors – notionally 0.5 per cllr over 3 years) Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole (76 councillors, 0.9)

Buckinghamshire (147 councillors, 0.3)

Herefordshire (53 councillors, 0.7)

Milton Keynes (57 councillors, 0.5)

Reading (48 councillors, 0.7)

Swindon (57 councillors, 0.2)

West Berkshire (43 councillors, 1.1)

Wiltshire (98 councillors, 0.3)

Wokingham (54 councillors, 0.5)

During discussion the following points were made:-

• Buckinghamshire Council did not have the responsibility or the authority to intervene in the governance of parish councils, but only to investigate complaints arising from code of conduct breaches. The council could also offer advice and support to parish councils alongside the Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes Association of Local Councils and other sources. If there were any problems with Parish Councillors new Councillors could be asked to stand for election, freedom of information requests could be made or a code of conduct complaint, which could lead to a Hearings Sub – Committee where Buckinghamshire councillors could apply sanctions.

·       Reference was made to a possible vote of no-confidence in town councillors and what would happen if this occurred. There was no role for this Council in such a circumstance. It would be for the parish/town council itself to determine its own governance. This Council and all the Town and Parish Councils have a responsibility to promote high standards of conduct. As Buckinghamshire Council had a responsibility to investigate complaints it was important to have a degree of independence in any matters of governance or procedural advice to town and parish councils. However, advice could be sought from Buckinghamshire Council on a case by case basis, in more general terms.

·       Reference was made to an email sent to the Monitoring Officer about a sanction relating to a previous complaint and it was agreed that a response should be written to the individual concerned by the Monitoring Officer rather than it being discussed at the Committee. 

·       It was highlighted that the Council would want to include examples of what could and could not be considered as a complaint under the Member Code arrangements (for example that the timeliness of a Member’s response to correspondence was not a Code issue) so as to manage resident expectations. A Member commented that it reflected badly on those councillors who did respond in a timely fashion. If a resident was unhappy with the performance of a councillor they could change their vote at the next election being held.

• The report included a table that showed the number and percentage of complaints received by Buckinghamshire Council and other similar authorities in the last three years. The Principal Governance Officer was thanked for this information. Members noted that Buckinghamshire Council had a lower ratio of complaints per councillor than most of the other authorities and suggested that this reflected the high standards of conduct among its members, particularly for such a large authority.
• In response to a question, it was noted that this Council regularly engaged with Milton Keynes and Buckinghamshire Association of Local Councils and also provided two training sessions a year on the Nolan Principles and Standards of Public Life including Civility and Respect. Buckinghamshire Council had also responded to Councils who had requested training which included Buckingham Town and Hughenden Parish Councils due to specific circumstances. It would be difficult in terms of resources to offer this to all Councils and judgement would be made on any such request.
• A comment was made that people had different values and therefore someone might feel disrespected even though this was not the intention.

·       A Member commented on the importance of councillors cultivating respect in the Council Chamber. It was also noted that it was up to the Council to determine its own culture. The Code did however provide a large scope for political debate and free speech as an integral part of democracy. 

RESOLVED that the report be noted.