Agenda item

Joint report of the Town Clerk and Comptroller and City Solicitor.

The Sub-Committee considered a joint report of the Town Clerk and the Comptroller and City Solicitor presenting a draft Members’ Code of Conduct for further consideration and review ahead of any wider consultation.

The Comptroller and City Solicitor introduced the report highlighting that the City Corporation were obligated to promote and maintain high standards of conduct amongst its elected and Co-opted Members in its capacity as a Local Authority and Police Authority. Under the Localism Act 2011, it was also necessary for it to adopt a Code of Conduct, consistent with the seven principles of public life and containing appropriate arrangements as to the registration and disclosure of pecuniary and other interests. It was underlined that there was no prescribed form of wording for such a Code which could be agreed locally. It was highlighted that there was nothing defective about the City Corporation’s current Code of Conduct but it was best practice to review this on a regular basis. It was reported that the Committee on Standards in Public Life recommended that the Local Government Association (LGA) create an updated model Code of Conduct following a consultation exercise. This had now been adopted by a number of local authorities but by no means universally.

The Civic Affairs Sub-Committee who had previously held responsibility for oversight of this area of work had agreed upon a hybrid Code for the City Corporation – adopting much of the model Code whilst also retaining some elements of the Corporation’s current Code around certain City-specific elements. The culmination of this was as set out within Appendix 1 of the report and was now presented for this Sub-Committee to comment on and approve ahead of any wider consultation involving all elected and Co-opted Members (including Independent Persons) prior to adoption. The Sub-Committee could also consider public consultation at this juncture. It was reported that, ultimately, the final Code would require approval by the Policy and Resources Committee and, subsequently, the Court of Common Council.

A Member queried what might happen to any outstanding complaint against a Member who went on to resign from the Court of Common Council. They added that they were pleased to see reference to charity work within the draft Code but underlined that there were different areas in which Members were involved with charities – one being where they sat on a Committee and the Corporation was corporate trustee and the other where they were individual trustees – they therefore queried whether the Code should clarify this. The Comptroller responded that, were there to be an existing complaint against someone who subsequently ceased to be a Member, the process could continue if felt appropriate/worthwhile although the subject person could not be compelled to attend any Panel meetings. He added that the available sanctions in these circumstances would be further limited with censure probably being the main option. In relation to charities, it was highlighted that paragraph C6.2 would apply to both scenarios, including situations where Members were individual trustees by virtue of their position on the Court of Common Council, and allow for action to be taken under the Code. He added that further changes to the wording could be considered if helpful.

Another Member stated that as well as being charity trustees, some Members also held company directorships by virtue of being an elected Member and cited the Finance Committee Chair as a specific example of this. They queried whether this might also be usefully reflected within the Code. The Comptroller and City Solicitor stated that this wording could be added for absolute clarity.

Another Member queried whether the Code could be more prescriptive as to appropriate use of resources/technology provided to Members. The Comptroller and City Solicitor responded to say that this was as set out within the Corporation’s separate IT Use Policy with which all Members were expected to comply. Whilst the Code was an overall behavioural framework tool there were clearly a number of other relevant policies sitting behind this such as the Planning Protocol for example which set out how those who were members of the Planning Committee were expected to behave. The Member responded to query whether there was therefore a definitive list of all other policies with which Members were expected to comply. The Comptroller and City Solicitor commented that the Code of Conduct may not be the best place to hold such a list given that policies often changed and that the Code itself was only reviewed approximately every 3 years. The point was made that each relevant policy should have a date by which it required review and that it was therefore reasonable to inform Members when the situation changed. One Member felt that it was also reasonable that all relevant policies should be referenced or linked within the Code. Another Member cautioned against this, stating that purporting to include a definitive list of policies, which subsequently became out of date, could lead to further problems. They therefore suggested simply highlighting that such other documents existed. Officers were supportive of this approach but understood the request from Members to be updated when any changes were made to relevant policy documents going forward. It was suggested that the Members’ Portal would be the most obvious place to link all relevant documents. The Comptroller and City Solicitor stated that the current drafting had been adopted from the LGA’s model Code, drawing attention to specific policies where it was felt that these were most relevant, but commented that a paragraph could be added to the beginning of the draft Code making it clear that there were other documents that needed to be read in conjunction with this, and listing the most important ones.

Subject to the inclusion of the points made above, the Sub-Committee were agreed that the draft Code should be shared with all elected and Co-opted Members as well as the Panel of Independent Persons by way of consultation. It was noted that it may necessitate further consideration by this Sub-Committee were any substantive comments to be received and that it would then be referred on to the Policy and Resources Committee and Court of Common Council for final approval ahead of adoption.

RESOLVED: - That Members:

·       Approve the latest version of the draft Code of Conduct subject to the inclusion of the additional comments made;

·       Confirm that they are then content for the draft document to be shared with all existing elected Members, Co-opted Members and the Panel of Independent Persons for further consultation.