Title

The local assessment of standards complaints comes into effect today – 8 May – following publication of the Standards committee (England) regulations 2008. So, after today, any complaint that an elected member has breached the code of conduct will be referred to the local standards committee. A sub-committee will decide if the complaint: should be referred to the monitoring officer for investigation requires some form of alternative action, eg, mediation or an apology doesn't constitute a code breach or doesn't warrant any further action. The complainant will have the right to request a review of the no-action decision by a further sub-committee. The review must be conducted within 30 days of the request. The chair of the committee should be an independent member, as should the chair of the sub-committees. However, if a standards committee doesn't have a sufficient number of independent members, it can ‘share' them with other authorities – providing he or she has no other connection to that authority. Although the committee must give a written summary of the allegation to the member complained against, the regulations allow this information to be given by the monitoring officer. This is a sensible, practicable provision. Otherwise, since the committee is unlikely to meet simply to decide to inform the member of the complaint, notification would be given after the standards sub-committee had met to undertake the initial assessment of the complaint – unless it would be contrary to the public interest, or might prejudice a proper investigation. At least three members must be present at meetings of the committee or sub-committees. One will be the independent chair, and one must be an elected member of the authority. A parish representative must also be present where parish matters are being considered, or where any allegation is against a parish councillor. The regulations set out the details of referrals of complaints to the monitoring officer, with a direction to take steps other than carrying out an investigation. Such referrals can only be made after consultation with the monitoring officer. Steps could include conciliation or member training, but there is no requirement for the member to co-operate. The regulations also set out the steps a monitoring officer must take in conducting a formal investigation, including the right to request an ethical standards officer deal with the matter, and to refer the matter back to the standards committee if, as a result of new evidence or information, it is more or less serious than was originally apparent or where the member concerned has died, is seriously ill or has resigned from the authority, such that the monitoring officer considers it is no longer appropriate to continue with the investigation. Curiously, at the completion of an investigation, the new regulations appear to introduce a requirement for the committee to meet not only to accept a finding of no failure but also, where the investigating officer finds there has been a breach, to decide there should be a hearing of the committee. This does seem to be a cumbersome and unnecessary step which will inevitable introduce delay into the process. The sanctions available to the committee are increased from a maximum of three to six months suspension. Overall, the new regulations do not introduce any great surprises. It is disappointing that the opportunity was not taken to tidy up the dispensation regulations, despite problems with the existing provisions, or to give a green light to joint committees which police and fire authorities, in particular, were keen to explore. Further regulations on these issues, and on the granting of exemptions from political restrictions, are promised later in the year. In the meantime urgent issues which standards committees will need to address are: publicising the new regime if necessary, increasing the size of the committee to deal with the creation of sub-committees, with the required mix of independent, elected and parish members, and with independent chairs exploring the potential for pooling arrangements for independent members with neighbouring authorities establishing initial assessment and review sub-committees reviewing the Standards Board guidance on local assessment, and how it will operate, and the new monitoring and audit arrangements putting the necessary training arrangements in place checking out the Standards Board's website where it has produced a toolkit on the local assessment of complaints taking local ownership of standards and conduct. Kirsty Cole is strategic director at Newark & Sherwood DC

Title

WHITEHALL

Standards finally go local

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING