Agenda and draft minutes

Introductions

The Town Clerk opened the meeting by introducing herself and stating that the Committee was quorate.

A roll call of Members present was undertaken.

The Town Clerk highlighted that the meeting was being recorded as well as live streamed and would be made available on the City Corporation’s YouTube page for a period of time after the meeting had concluded. With this in mind, it was confirmed that participants in the meeting had all individually agreed and given their consent to being recorded and that all personal data would be processed in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018. The Town Clerk highlighted that, for further information on this, viewers could contact the City Corporation using the details provided on the public webpages.

The Deputy Chair (in the Chair) then introduced himself and welcomed all those in attendance and viewing the meeting via YouTube. He commented that, under the new governance arrangements recently approved by the City with regard to its Standards regime, this was likely to be the last meeting of the Standards Committee.

Apologies for absence were received from Vivienne Littlechild.

There were no declarations.

To agree the public minutes and summary of the meeting held virtually on 2 October 2020.

The public minutes of the meeting held virtually on 2 October 2020 were considered and approved as a correct record.

The Committee discussed the Governance Review recommendations and transitional arrangements pertaining to the City’s Standards regime. The Deputy Chair invited any questions or comments that the wider Committee might have.

A Co-opted Member commented that she welcomed the proposals pertaining to dispensations. However, she was of the view that the proposals around complaints under the Member Code of Conduct were not an improvement on the current system, particularly when the Court of Common Council had thrown out recommendations on sanctions from both the Standards Committee and the Standards Appeals Committee when a Member had been found to be in breach of the Code in the past. The Co-opted Member went on to state that she could see nothing under these new proposals to stop the same from happening again when recommendations were put to the Court from the new Independent Panel. She went on to comment that, under existing arrangements, the Court were not able to overturn a finding of a breach but that, as she understood it, under the proposed approach, even this would be possible. She underlined that, to truly improve on standards in the City Corporation, there needed to be a change of culture which would require training yet she noted that Members had, again, rejected an external recommendation to make training on conduct and standards a pre-condition for sitting on Committees (made originally by Charles Bourne QC and now by Lord Lisvane).

Another Co-opted Member echoed the thoughts of the previous speaker. He commented that he was now the longest serving Co-opted Member of the Committee and had began serving under one regime which had then been changed under the Bourne Review without consulting Co-opted Members and now further changes were proposed. He stated that he felt that the problem was not with the regime and

The Comptroller and City Solicitor to be heard.

The Committee received a copy of the Local Government Association Model Councillor Code of Conduct 2020.

The Deputy Chair reminded Members that the consultation on this document was now closed and that the final version was now presented for information. It was noted that it would be for the Committee’s successors to pay due regard to the document.

A Member commented that the definition of who was caught by the term Councillor was anyone who sits on a Council Committee or Sub-Committee and has a vote. He remarked that, in some parts of the Corporation, whether someone had a vote or not and whether the vote was restricted in any way (e.g. the ability to vote on substantive items but not on the election of a Chairman) differed as a result of differing terms of reference. He therefore asked the Comptroller and City Solicitor whether he felt that anyone sitting on a Corporation Committee (particularly external members)  were left uncaptured by the Code under this definition.  The Comptroller and City Solicitor commented that all of the City’s Co-opted Members, whether they had a vote or not, were caught by the City Corporation’s own Code but recognised that there was work to be done in future to examine the LGA Code further and compare it with this. Under the new arrangements approved by the Court of Common Council, this would be a matter for the Members Privileges Sub-Committee in the first instance, although it was suggested that it would be best to review this once the new Independent Panel were in place so that they could also be consulted.

RECEIVED.

Joint report of the Director of Human Resources and the Comptroller and City Solicitor.

The Committee received a joint report of the Director of Human Resources and the Comptroller and City Solicitor providing Members with the annual review of the Protocol on Member/Officer Relations and highlighting any related issues that have arisen during 2020.

Officers reported that there had been very little activity in terms of the Protocol in relation to staff over the last year.

A Member spoke to question reference within the report to the one formal dispute under the Dispute Procedure being withdrawn prior to assessment and asked for further details on this. The Comptroller and City Solicitor reported that this particular case was withdrawn by the complainant at the onset of the pandemic as they had considered that pursuing this would not be in the public interest or an effective use of Member and Office time at a time of national crisis.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

There were no questions.

Thanks

A Co-opted Member spoke to place on record and publicly thank the Comptroller and City Solicitor, his staff and representatives of the Town Clerk’s Office who had so ably and diligently supported the work of this Committee over the past 8 years. He referred to the Officers as enormously and increasingly resilient, polite, efficient, well-organised and a pleasure to work with and thanked them for providing a consistently high level of service. This was endorsed by other Co-opted Members and the Deputy Chairman spoke to endorse this on behalf of the Committee and ask that this be recorded in the minutes.

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)

               10                                                                                         3         

               11                                                                                         2

To agree the non-public minutes of the meeting held virtually on 2 October 2020.

The Committee considered the non-public minutes of the meeting held virtually on 2 October 2020 and approved them as a correct record.

To agree the confidential minutes of the meeting held virtually on 2 October 2020.

The Committee considered the confidential minutes of the meeting held virtually on 2 October 2020 and approved them as a correct record.