Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Dan Large (Co-opted).

Judith Barnes (Co-opted) declared a personal interest in agenda item 15.

To receive the Order of the Court of Common Council appointing the Committee dated 16 July 2020.

The Committee received the Order of the Court of Common Council of 16 July 2020  appointing the Committee and setting out its terms of reference for the ensuing year.

The Town Clerk highlighted that there were currently two vacancies on the Committee and that they would now be advertised to the full Court until such time as they were filled.

RECEIVED.

To elect a Chairman in accordance with Standing Order No. 29.

The Committee proceeded to elect a Chairman in accordance with Standing Order No. 29. 

A list of Members who had expressed an interest in and were eligible to stand was read by the Town Clerk and Caroline Addy being the only Member expressing willingness to serve was duly elected Chairman for the ensuing year and took the Chair.

Ms Addy thanked the Committee for their support. The new Chair also went on to record her thanks to those who had now left the Committee – Ann Holmes, Edward Lord and Barbara Newman and to welcome new Member Helen Fentimen.

To elect a Deputy Chairman in accordance with Standing Order No. 30.

The Committee proceeded to elect a Deputy Chairman in accordance with Standing Order No. 30. 

A list of Members who had expressed an interest in and were eligible to stand was read by the Town Clerk and Randall Anderson being the only Member expressing willingness to serve was duly elected Deputy Chairman for the ensuing year.

VOTE OF THANKS

Proposed by Barbara Newman;

Seconded unanimously;

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Members of the Standards Committee wish to place on record their sincere appreciation to

ANN HOLMES

for the courteous, enthusiastic and good-humoured manner in which she has carried out the duties of Chairman of this Committee since May 2019 and the leadership that she has shown in steering it through a significant period of change over the past year.

ANN’S year as Chairman saw much change and began with the appointment of seven new Committee Members. During her Chairmanship, the independent element of the work of the Committee and the wider Standards regime was also strengthened with a move to appoint a total of five as opposed to four Co-opted Members and, more recently, four instead of three Independent Persons – moves supported by the Court of Common Council.

MORE widely reported, was Ann’s overseeing of further revisions to the City Corporation’s Dispensations Policy and Guidance, with a view to providing an enhanced level of consistency and strengthening rules around dispensations to speak and vote. This was an emotive and complex matter and the new requirements came into effect as of January 2020 following thorough consultation and, ultimately, consideration of the views of Leading Counsel on the matter.

ANOTHER key area of the Committee’s work under Ann has been its consideration of the recommendations arising from the Review of Local Government Ethical Standards by the Committee on Standards in Public Life

To agree the public minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held virtually on 1 May 2020.

The public minutes of the meeting held virtually on 1 May 2020 were considered.

MATTERS ARISING

Member v. Member Complaints (page 6) – A Co-opted Member questioned if the Comptroller and City Solicitor had had the opportunity to gather any comparative data from other similar legislative bodies to ascertain whether the number of Member on Member complaints dealt with by the City Corporation was an anomaly. The Comptroller and City Solicitor reported that this work had had to be deprioritised in the face of the current pandemic but that he would make contact with those boroughs that the City Corporation had the most contact with on these matters, with a view to reporting back to the Committee on this at their next meeting in January 2021.

To receive the public minutes and non-public summary of various Standards Sub Committee meetings that have met since the grand Committee last convened.

The Committee received the minutes of the Assessment Sub (Standards) Committee meeting held virtually on 31 July 2020.

RECEIVED.

The Committee received the minutes of the Assessment Sub (Standards) Committee meeting held virtually on 3 September 2020.

RECEIVED.

The Committee received the minutes of the Dispensations Sub (Standards) Committee meeting held virtually on 18 September 2020.

A Co-opted Member commented that she was assuming that the dispensations granted were in line with the Dispensations Policy but that, if so, that did not seem to be what was recorded here as what the decision appeared to do was to grant a dispensation to speak on general housing matters without saying what they are and cross referencing the definition as set out within the Policy. The decision also did not appear to limit the right to speak in any way whereas the policy limits it to housing matters that affect all of the Corporation’s tenants or leaseholders on a particular estate equally. She went on to argue that, without those elements explicitly included, the dispensation granted would appear to be unlawful as per the advice of Leading Counsel and asked that they therefore be included within the decision and public minutes.

The Chair agreed that it was preferable for the decision to be explicit in terms of compliance with the Policy and asked that the amendment be made with the final version of the minutes referred back to the members of the Sub-Committee for approval ahead of publication.  

RECEIVED.

Report of the Comptroller and City Solicitor.

The Committee considered a report of the Comptroller and City Solicitor relative to the introduction of fixed terms for Independent Persons.

The Comptroller and City Solicitor clarified that the main decision for the Committee today was around the length of term to be introduced.

The Chair commented that, in her opinion, the argument that there should be fixed terms for Independent Persons was unarguable. She added that independence and the appearance of independence was an important factor in determining length of term as was having sufficient time to know and understand the mechanics. She concluded by stating that her preference would be to not adopt a 4 year term renewable once as she felt that 8 years was a long term and would prefer to see a speedier turnover.

A Member spoke to compare and contrast with other Corporation Committees in terms of the length of terms granted to independent or external appointees. He highlighted that the external appointees played a particularly important role on the Audit and Risk Management Committee where they were appointed for a maximum of 3 periods of 3 years (9 years in total). Likewise, recommendations from the Charity Commission for Trustees sitting on Trusts were around a maximum of 9 years. He suggested that the Committee might therefore reflect on this before deciding that a term of 8 years might be too long.

Another Member spoke to agree with the previous speaker stating that he would be content with two terms of four years and stressing that he felt that there were many benefits to continuity of service. He added that this approach had been adopted by the Education Board which he had formerly chaired and had been successful. In his experience, this also seemed to be the approach taken with corporate appointments.

The Chair

Governance Review – Lord Lisvane’s Recommendations

A Member referred to the recently published Lisvane recommendations, particularly those pertaining to this Committee and questioned whether it might be appropriate for Members here to be seen to accept these and to agree with the Committee’s abolition and replacement with an independent body – something that he would personally like to see acted upon by no later than April 2021. He accepted that, ultimately, the recommendations would need to be considered by the Policy and Resources Committee and the Court of Common Council.

The Chair commented that she had wanted to place this matter on the agenda today for proper discussion but had been advised that the recommendations would now be considered by the Resource Allocation Sub Committee (RASC) and that it was not appropriate for individual committees to discuss the adoption or rejection of any recommendations in an ad hoc way. She would, however, expect this Committee to have an appropriate opportunity to discuss the matter at their next meeting in January 2021and to make their views heard. She added that she would be very happy, at this stage, to record the Committee’s willingness to work constructively with RASC and all other relevant bodies on the adoption of a new or amended standards regime.

A Member questioned whether it might be possible for the Committee to give some further thought to this matter after next week’s Court of Common Council meeting with a view to influencing outcomes around any new arrangements.

The Deputy Chair commented that he was fairly confident that RASC would look to prioritise addressing recommendations pertaining to Standards. He added that members of this Committee were best versed in its work and role and that he therefore thought it was incumbent upon them to assist this process in any

There were no additional, urgent items of business for consideration.

MOTION: That, under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

RESOLVED -  That, under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

            Item No                                                                       Paragraph No(s)

               12                                                                                         3

            13 – 14                                                                                    -

        15a) – 15b)                                                                             1 & 2

To agree the non-public minutes of the previous meeting held virtually on 1 May 2020.

The Committee considered the non-public minutes of the meeting held virtually on 1 May 2020 and approved them as a correct record.

There were no questions raised in the non-public session.

There were no additional, urgent, items of business for consideration in the non-public session.

To receive the non-public minutes and relating decision letters of Assessment Sub (Standards) Committee meetings that have taken place since the grand Committee last convened.