Issue - meetings

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services presented the report to the committee which provided Members with an update on standards issues over the last six months. He said that he was required to provide an update to the committee at each meeting as set out in the Constitution. Paragraph 2.4 of the report set out the latest complaints received since the last committee which were anonymised but gave Members an idea of the kind of complaints received and how they had been resolved.

Councillor Carter asked for clarification under paragraph 2.4 where complaints were described as “Member not ‘in capacity’ under s.27(2) Localism Act’. 

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services explained that the Localism Act recognised that councillors were not acting as councillors at all times and so any complaint against a councillor must have happened when a councillor was undertaking council business or involved with an issue that was relevant to the council. He said that this was the first test for a complaint before it could be further assessed.

The Independent Person said that the legislation provided for this specific test and must be applied first to any complaint.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services said that there were examples of cases across the country which pointed to certain scenarios where a member had behaved in a certain way and determined whether they were in capacity or not. He said if the complaint did not meet this first test, then the complaint went no further.

Councillor Stowe asked if it was correct that if a councillor resigned whilst the subject of a complaint then the complaint falls once they were no longer in office. He also asked how much information would be available if the complaints were subject to a Freedom of Information request.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services confirmed that if a councillor resigned whilst being the subject of a complaint then the matter would fall away. He said however that if that Member came back into an elected position within a certain timeframe, then the complaint was reopened. He said this was to stop Members resigning to ensure the complaint was closed and then get themselves co-opted back onto the Council. In response to the Freedom of Information question, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services said that it would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on how sensitive the complaint was.

Councillor Furness referred to the table at paragraph 2.4 and asked why case number 11 was missing.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services said that paragraph 2.5 explained that if a complaint had been withdrawn by the complainant, then they were not listed. He said he would be happy to include withdrawn complaints in the table if the committee would find this useful.

Councillor Townsend felt that the list should be presented in numerical order with the withdrawn complaints included for clarity. The Committee agreed with this suggestion.

Councillor Parsad-Wyatt asked if the 13 complaints  ...  view the full minutes text for item 299