5.1
|
The Committee received a report of the
Director of Legal and Governance.
|
5.2
|
The Director of Legal and Governance informed
the Committee that the report mentioned was reviewed annually by
the Audit and Standards Committee.
|
5.3
|
The report highlighted the current procedure
when dealing with complaints against elected members. The report
also outlined the current code of conduct which members adhered
to.
|
5.4
|
The procedure for dealing with complaints and
the code of conduct was last reviewed and agreed by Full Council in
January 2021.
|
5.5
|
The Audit and Standards Committee carried out
an Ethical Standards Workshop in September 2019 where they looked
at the code of conduct, in which no changes were proposed. The
Committee then carried out a Complex Case Workshop in November 2020
where they looked into the procedure for dealing with complaints,
in which amendments were proposed, therefore the report included
those amendments.
|
5.6
|
Members of the Committee raised questions and
the key points to note were: -
|
5.7
|
The Director of Legal and Governance explained
why there was different use of wording around whether something was
a fixed timeframe, or whether a timeframe was aimed to be
met. It was mentioned that some parts
of the process were simple administration tasks, which meant a
fixed timeframe had been agreed. Alternatively, where there were
more complex stages of the process, it was reported that a
timeframe would seek to be met. The Director of Legal and
Governance added that the time it took for a third party to
investigate a complaint could vary on each case, therefore it would
be difficult to establish a timeframe.
|
5.8
|
A Member of the Committee thought there needed
to be more clarity in the process for when timeframes were not met.
It was mentioned that if a timeframe was not met, the complainant
should receive in writing the reasoning for this, along with how
long the timeframe was to be extended by.
|
5.9
|
A Member of the Committee thought it needed to
be clearer that an elected member, who was subject to a standards
complaint, were entitled to advice and support from the independent
person. The independent person, David Waxman, believed the wording
should state the independent person was in place to give further
clarity on the process rather than support.
|
5.10
|
Another Member of the Committee suggested the
wording stated that the independent person was available for advice
on the process and additionally, that an elected member could
receive support from other professionals, if they wished.
|
5.11
|
The Director of Legal and Governance added
that members were entitled to the Council’s counselling
service. Therefore, there was support in place for an elected
member, subject to a standards complaint, if necessary.
|
5.12
|
The Director of Legal and Governance agreed to
redraft the process, subject to the points raised at 5.8 to 5.10
then circulate the proposed amendments to the Committee, for their
consideration.
|
5.13
|
A Member of the Committee asked what
consequence would occur if an elected member refused
...
view the full minutes text for item 5.
|