22 09 2003

 

Apologies for inability to attend the meeting were received on behalf of Councillor Cully.

 

 

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 3 July 2003, subject to it being noted that Councillors Mrs Angus and Mrs Wright were present, be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record.

 

 

Further to information presented to the Committee at its meeting on 3 July 2003, in respect of Regulations that would enable Ethical Standards Officers (ESO) to refer complaints for local determination following investigation by the ESO, the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer advised Members that the Standards Board for England had recently issued Guidance for Standards Committees and Monitoring Officers on the local determination process.

 

Under the Local Authorities (Code of Conduct) (Local Determination) Regulations 2003, ESOs could refer completed investigation reports to monitoring officers for Standard Committees to determine whether or not a Member had failed to follow the Code of Conduct and, if so, what penalty should be adopted, if any.

 

The guidance provided practical procedural information on how to prepare for and hold a hearing and, under the Regulations, although the model procedures were not compulsory Standard Committees must take the guidance into account and ensure that any procedures were consistent with the principles in the guidance.

 

The main components of the local determination process should include:

 

Ø      Referrals from the ESO;

Ø      The pre-hearing process

Ø      The Standards Committee hearing;

Ø      Notice of findings; and

Ø      Appeals to The Adjudication Panel for England.

 

The guidance provided model checklists, timescales and procedural arrangements for the Committee hearing, together with sanctions available to the Committee.  Procedures for the right of appeal to The Adjudication Panel for England were also outlined in the Guidance booklet.

 

The Standards Board for England recommended that hearings should be held in public where possible to make sure that the hearing process was open and fair.  However, there might be occasions when hearings would be held in private to prevent ‘confidential’ and/or ‘exempt’ information being revealed to the public.

 

The Council’s Constitution included in Part 4 of Schedule 17 – ‘Procedures of Conduct and Standards Committee’ and the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer would be reviewing the provisions to ensure that they were compatible with the Regulations and the Guidance.

 

The Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer would be submitting a further report to the Committee for consideration of proposed checklists, timescales and procedure to be adopted for local determination hearings.

 

RESOLVED: That the Standards Board for England Guidance on local determinations by Standards Committees be noted.

 

 

Consideration was given to the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer’s report setting out proposed changes to the Council’s Corporate Complaints procedure, which has been in operation for a number of years.

 

The Council’s complaints procedure was consistent with the good practice guide issued by the Commission for Local Administration in England and local authority practice but would be strengthened by including timescales for each stage of the process, as detailed in the report.

 

It was important to publicise the complaints procedure and in addition to a leaflet being available at the Town Hall and local libraries, it was proposed to produce a specific page on the Council’s website.  The complaints form, to be included in the information leaflet, would also be available on the website to provide the opportunity for complaints to be registered electronically.

At the conclusion of consideration of a complaint, it was proposed to evaluate customer satisfaction by requesting the complainant to feedback their views on the procedure.

 

Monitoring the number and type of complaints received from customers was considered to be a useful tool for ensuring that the Council delivered services that met its customers’ expectations.  At present, there was no formalised procedure for monitoring corporately although complaints referred to the Local Government Ombudsman were reported to Members regularly.  It was noted that there was not a consistent approach for reporting other complaints to the Boards.

 

It was proposed therefore that a quarterly monitoring report would be prepared for the Council Management Team, with twice yearly reports being presented to this Committee.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)    the proposed changes, as set out in the report, be noted; and

 

(2)    the arrangements for monitoring performance on complaints be

        approved.

 

 

Consideration was given to a joint report by the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring and the Head of Internal Audit advising Members of proposals to implement the CIPFA/SOLACE framework for corporate governance.  The report also outlined proposals for an ethical audit to be undertaken.

 

Whilst corporate governance had been a subject of a number of reports and publications, there had not been a comprehensive framework of principles and standards for local authorities to adhere to.  It was proposed to use the guidance published in 2001 by CIPFA and SOLACE, which incorporated a series of checklists, to assist in the development of a formal framework for Gosport Borough Council to firstly self assess and then produce an action plan to demonstrate compliance against best practice of corporate governance.

 

The Council Management Team had approved the setting up of an officer working group to progress the implementation of a system by which the Council directed and controlled their functions and related to their communities.

 

It was also proposed that an ‘ethical governance audit’ be undertaken, which would assist in assessing any ethical vulnerabilities facing the Council.  The Committee considered the proposed questionnaire that would be sent to all Members of the Council, a random sample of officers, Residents Panel, partners and other agencies.  The results would be useful data in deciding when changes in governance were needed and how best to devote resources to training on conduct matters.

 

The analysed results of the ethical governance audit and the progress on the implementation of the corporate governance framework would be reported to this Committee later in the year.

 

During discussion, Members expressed their support for a consistent approach to corporate governance and to a review of protocols for Members and officers to build links for enhanced working together.

 

The Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer suggested that information in respect of corporate governance and the ethical governance audit could be available in the Members Room and an article published in the Members’ Information Bulletin.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)   the formation of an officer working group dealing with the implementation

       of the CIPFA/SOLACE Framework for Corporate Governance be noted; and

 

(2)   approval be given for an Ethical Governance Audit to be undertaken.

 

 

The meeting concluded at 6.25pm

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                      CHAIRMAN