Ethical standards clinic
What issues should the Standards Committee consider now so as
to prepare for the implementation of the new ethical
framework?
Whilst some of the detail of the way in which Standards
Committees will assess complaints received, there are some issues
which Standards Committees could consider and decide in principle,
subject to the Regulations and SBE guidance.
Firstly, the Standards Committee could consider the target time
for assessing complaints, from the date of receipt to the date of
decision whether to refer or take no action. One possible model is
to set up a four week cycle of Standards Committee meetings, so
that a complaint received within each four week cycle is prepared
and submitted for consideration by the Standards Committee. Each
complaint will therefore be received and decided upon with in a
period of no more than four weeks. This would seem to be a
reasonable period of time to ensure that members will be available
to attend meetings and to ensure that the complaint is dealt with
timely.
The authority may not receive significant numbers of complaints
and therefore there may not be any business for the Committees at
each four-week meeting. Any meetings at which there are no
complaints to consider could either be cancelled or used to discuss
other matters in the Committee’s work plan or used to consider
applications for exemption from political restrictions of any
officer posts.
Secondly, officer resources and roles could be considered.
Depending on the nature of the authority, the number of parishes
for which it is responsible, and the amount of publicity given to
the Council’s complaints process for member conduct, the number of
complaints received may place an added strain on the resources of
the Council, in particular the Monitoring Officer. An issue to
consider is whether the complaints concerning member conduct will,
operationally, be received by the Monitoring Officer. Although the
complaint is to the Standards Committee, in practice, it will be
received and handled by officers. It is unlikely that the
Monitoring Officer will be able to handle every complaint received.
There may be a need for the Monitoring Officer to carry out an
initial check as to jurisdiction, i.e. does the complaint relate to
a member; does the complaint refer to a possible breach of the code
or does it concern a council policy? The Monitoring Officer may
also need to prepare a report with a recommendation for the
Committee’s consideration, as well as give advice to the Committee
as to their deliberations.
It may be that, in principle the Council agrees to appoint an
officer to carry out these roles or to free up resources from
elsewhere within the authority. This is something which the
Committee could begin to consider now. Another question is whether
the Monitoring Officer should undertake these roles where one of
the decisions that could be made is to refer the complaint to the
Monitoring Officer. It may be that another officer should be
appointed to prepare a short report about complaints received and
to advise the Committee as to action so as to avoid possible
suggestions that the Monitoring Officer is influencing the decision
of the Committee as to referral where the Committee is not
referring many complaints, or they are mainly referred to the SBE.
Whilst in practice, this is unlikely, some vociferous complainants
could reach such an obtuse conclusion.
Standards Committees could start to consider whether it wants to
use local criteria (in addition to national criteria), and what
that local criteria may be, when deciding whether to refer the
complaint, where it should be referred, and whether no action
should be taken. It is expected that the SBE will recommend
national criteria for assessing complaints, but there may be some
specific issues which the Committee consider are appropriate.
Committees may wish to have a debate now as to the type of criteria
which may be appropriate, proportionate and reasonable. Also, in
order to assist the Committee with its role, a process map could be
created, identifying the various steps in the overall structure of
assessing complaints as set out in the legislation. By creating
this process map, the Committee can then identify where
supplementary guidance, documentation and further detail will be
needed. A work plan can then be developed to ensure that the needs
are met. Committees may also wish to consider the way in which
their decisions should be presented to complainants and the subject
members, such as how detailed should the reasons be when deciding
that no action should be taken? Should reasons be provided to the
subject member if the Committee refers the complaint to the
Monitoring Officer or the SBE? Also, Committees may wish to
consider whether to set targets for the average number of
complaints per year that are referred either to the Monitoring
Officer or the SBE.
We have the invaluable benefit of Claire’s experience having
worked at the SBE and been involved in setting up effective
procedures for assessing complaints, developing the Board’s
criteria for assessing complaints, handling reviews and advising
generally in relation to the assessment process.