Agenda item

Report of the Town Clerk.

The Sub-Committee considered a report of the Town Clerk which detailed recommendations and findings of the Local Government Association’s independent review of Members behaviour. The review having been commissioned by the Town Clerk, supported by the Chief Commoner and Policy Chairman.

By way of consultation, the document had been shared with the full Court membership at their meeting of Informal Court in February 2024, this had allowed for discussion in advance of a formal response to this Sub-Committee, the Policy and Resources Committee and, ultimately, the Court of Common Council for adoption.

To further direct and instruct the Town Clerk in terms of next steps, the Sub-Committee reflected and responded to questions posed in paragraph 7 of the document, with the aim of, under delegated authority, instructing officers to devise an action plan to be further considered in advance of its adoption.

The Chief Commoner reflected on the code of conduct and sanctioned mandatory training for specific core elements such as the role of committee chairman, with the potential instruction that Members were unlikely to chair a committee if they had not completed the training. 

The Town Clerk suggested a common-sense approach to the action plan which felt appropriate. Members acknowledged that implementation of the code required a key culture shift and that not all Members would engage and take responsibility for challenging poor behaviour.

The Sub-Committee discussed, in turn, the key points raised in paragraph 7 of the independent review document. Considering 7a of the paper, what does “good” look like, it was agreed that a Corporation Mission Statement was a good idea and could feature on the homepage of, the Corporation’s website.  Members further suggested that in addition to what “good” looks like there should also be a statement, in the avoidance of doubt, referencing “what is not acceptable” behaviours.  The Sub-Committee were conscious of the requirement to address the disconnect between what we think we are and how we are perceived as an organisation. Training and cultural competence would be incorporated alongside the Sub-Committee’s comments into the final document.

There were no changes suggested to 7b of the paper, which related to messaging around expectations and standards of behaviour.  It was commented that this could be reinforced by the mission statement as it would appear on the intranet homepage.

The introduction of a “buddying” system for new Members was discussed at 7c, which was received and supported by the Sub-Committee, however the suggestion that a pool of ward deputies was not favoured or supported by Members generally and an alternative approach of a register of volunteers was preferred.  It was recognised that seniority was not an indication of appropriateness for the role.  Volunteers would be requested to provide a written statement with reasons why they felt  they would make a good buddy, what experiences, skills and expertise they would bring to the role, this would give new Members a menu of choice and would also focus Members to update their own skills, expertise and interests  register.

The Chief Elect commented that this approach could foster the buddying relationships for new Members as they join committees, the respective Chairs and Deputy Chairs as experts in the business and portfolio of their committee, imparting knowledge in terms of their role and responsibilities.  The Town Clerk, reminded Members that some existing deputies were new to their role and to the Court in 2022 and they would have benefited from that level of support.

Mandatory training for chairs, as detailed in 7d of the document was not generally received well by Members as debated at Informal Court, some Members argued that the necessary skills had been acquired organically by serving on a committee.  Some existing chairs had started the process of asking for feedback on their performance; this approach was welcomed by the Sub-Committee agreeing that feedback would support performance if done in a clear and dignified way and  used as a period of reflection; the need for acceptance of negativity whilst still being enlightened. Members also considered chairs and deputies observing a range of committees to determine what “good” looks like. The Chief Elect discussed the possible introduction of an annual survey to measure chairs’ performance, this would capture those who had been either reluctant or unaware of others concerns. The Town Clerk was encouraged by the suggestion of an annual appraisal process, and proposed that a general service provision questionnaire for the Governance and Member Services Team could contain potential questions to help identify where changes to committee conduct, process and procedure may be useful, alongside identifying training needs more broadly. This could be tested with the Sub-Committee to enable the identification of specific concerns are related to chairing.

Reflecting on comments made at 7e, measuring success in terms of the revised pre-complaint protocol, the Chief Commoner had successfully performed as an internal mediator for Member on Member complaints. There had been some appetite for the introduction of a similar process for Member on officer complaints.

The focus of “allyship” in 7f and the support for Members to call out bad behaviours, the Sub-Committee felt that this would be predominantly the role of the committee chair as they would be best placed to correct the situation without being personal and support from the EDI Sub-Committee as they could act as champions. Members commented that the City should also continue to aim to be a culture of openness and transparency, which is highlighted through the code of conduct, the build on an environment of learning and making better decisions which supports the City as a learning organisation whose commitment and aims were demonstrated through the Learning and Development Strategy.

The Sub-Committee were in agreement that once the document had  comments incorporated the final report should be presented to the Policy and Resources Committee and then to the Court of Common Council for adoption.

RESOLVED: To note and considered the points raised (both at the Informal Court meeting in February 2024 and by direct response of the Town Clerk) in relation to the specific questions posed by the Reviewer and Sub-Committee as set out in paragraph 7 of the review and instruct the Town Clerk to bring forward final proposals to the Policy and Resources Committee and Court of Common Council for final adoption.