Subject: Standards
Update
Date of meeting: 29 November 2022
Report of: Monitoring Officer
Contact Officer: Name: Victoria Simpson, Senior Lawyer
– Corporate Law
Email: Victoria.Simpson@brighton-hove.gov.uk
Ward(s) affected: All
For general release
1.1
To provide Committee with a quarterly update on
member complaints and on Standards-related matters.
2
Recommendations
2.1
That Committee notes the information in this
Report.
3
Context
Background
3.1
Members are aware of the provisions in the
Localism Act 2011 which require the Council to maintain arrangements for reviewing
and determining complaints that elected and co-opted members have breached the
Council’s Code of Conduct for Members.
3.2
This Report provides information to assist this
Committee in discharging its delegated responsibilities to promote and maintain
high standards of conduct by members.
Member complaints: the overall
picture
3.3
A key aim of the regular update report is to
provide reassurance regarding the progression of standards complaints which the
Council has received and which it has either determined recently or is in the
process of considering. In this context, Members’ attention has been drawn to
the challenges generated by the increase in complaints against elected members
in recent months.
3.4
A Report providing members with the overall picture regarding complaints
made during 2022 is planned for the next meeting of this Committee, in January
2023. This will provide data on member complaints over a twelve month period.
It will endeavour to identify any overall trends both in terms of the volume of
complaints and their subject matter.
4.1
Complaint M/2O21 was referred to in the last report as having not yet been
concluded. The Monitoring Officer reviewed the complaint against the tests
provided in the Procedure for Dealing with Allegations of Breaches of the Code
of Conduct by Elected and Co-opted Members. The Monitoring Officer took the
decision to resolve the matter informally on the facts, discontinuing the
investigation on the basis that a formal investigation was no longer
proportionate and necessary in the public interest. As a result, the process has
been concluded.
4.2
Complaints F1/2021 and O1/2021 concerned an elected
councillor who has continued not to engage with the complaints process despite
being informed that the Monitoring Officer took the view that their conduct had
potential to amount to a breach of the requirement that they treat others
(including officers) with respect. While no apology has been forthcoming, the
comments which gave rise to the complaint were deleted by the subject member at
some point prior to September 2022. Having consulted with the Independent Person,
the Monitoring Officer then took the view that - although this outcome was not
an optimal one - the deletion of the comments did provide sufficient basis for
a decision that it would not be proportionate to pursue the matter to a formal
investigation. A decision was made to decide to resolve the matter informally
without taking any further action.
4.3
Complaints M1/2021 and N1/2021 concerned the social media
comments by an elected member on behalf of their political group. That member
responded to communications sent as part of this process, including an email
letting them know that their conduct was considered to have potential to amount
to a breach of the Code. Although they did not apologise for their conduct,
they gave a clear account of the context in which they made the decision to respond
in terms which gave rise to the complaints. That account provided a basis on
which the Independent Person and the Monitoring Officer took the view that that
complaint could be resolved by taking no further action on the basis that it would
not be proportionate and necessary in the public interest to refer it for
formal investigation.
4.4
The elected member who was the subject of complaint A/2022 did
not respond to communications regarding it. Having considered all of the facts,
the Monitoring Officer and the Independent Person agreed that this was a matter
which was sufficiently serious to merit referral for formal investigation. As a
result, an investigator was appointed to carry out an investigation and a draft
report has since been circulated to both parties. At time of writing, it is for
the Monitoring Officer to determine next steps.
4.5
Paragraph 4.8 of the last update report referred to nine complaints
received about a single elected member’s conduct when discussing a key topic on
social media, seven of which had already been determined by a decision to take
no further action. The member concerned did not respond to any communications
about any of the complaints. Following a further attempt to engage them, a
decision was made to refer complaint E/2022, as well as complaint J/2022
for formal investigation. That process is at the same stage as complaint A/2022
at time of writing.
4.6
Complaint O/2022 has been determined by a decision to take no
further action on the basis that the Monitoring Officer and the Independent Person
were both in agreement that there was insufficient evidence to support the
complaint. Complaints C/2022 and D/2022 concerned a different
elected member and a separate complaint but were also determined by a decision
to take no further action on the basis that the Independent Person and the Monitoring
Officer were in accord that insufficient evidence of a breach had been
identified. As with all of the complaints not proceeded with at preliminary
assessment stage, the parties received an explanation of the rationale for this
decision.
4.7
Complaints P/2O22 and Q/2022 were also considered in a
detailed way. In P/2022, detailed analysis of the newspaper article
complained of was made alongside a process of reflecting on representations made
by the subject member as well as the complainant. That complaint was ultimately
determined by a decision by the Monitoring Officer, acting in accord with the Independent
Person, that insufficient evidence of the alleged breach existed and that it
was not considered to be in the public interest to progress the complaint. The
member who was the subject of the complaint was however asked to take all
possible care to ensure complete accuracy in relation to any public comments
made about others in future.
4.8
Q/2022 required a series of communications to be made by officers
in order to establish the facts surrounding a dispute between neighbours.
Whilst the member whose conduct was complained of did not provide a response to
requests for clarificatory information during the latter part of the process,
sufficient information was obtained to enable a decision by the Monitoring Officer
- having consulted with the Independent Person - that the councillor was not
acting in their capacity as a member during the conduct complained of. As a
result, that complaint was also determined by a decision to take no further
action.
5
Complaints received in since the last update to Committee
5.1
Complaints R/2022 and S/2022 concerned the same subject
member and asserted that their activities in their ward were such as to create
a conflict of interest in a matter which came before them in their capacity as
a committee member. However having considered the detailed comments made by the
member, the Monitoring Officer agreed with the Independent Person’s view that
the evidence supplied did not establish any such conflict of interest and that
as a result there was insufficient evidence to support the allegation of a
breach of the Code. The complaint was therefore determined on that basis.
5.2
Complaint T/2022 alleged that the terms used by an elected member
when commenting publicly on a contested issue did not meet the Council’s
equalities standards and amounted to a breach of the Code. The Monitoring Officer
however agreed with the Independent Person’s assessment that – considering the
conduct complained of, including the vocabulary used – there was insufficient
evidence of any breach. This complaint was therefore determined by a decision
to take no further action on that basis.
5.3
Complaint U/2022 alleged that a councillor who had made
representations about a planning application had a conflict of interest. Having
considered the complaint and the councillor's comments regarding her lack of a
conflict, the view was taken that there was an absence of scope for such
conflict on the facts provided and that therefore insufficient evidence of a
breach existed to merit any action. The complaint was therefore determined on
that basis.
5.4
Complaint V/2022 was made against two members of the same group.
It alleged that they had breached the Code when participating in a residents
meeting by preventing consensus being reached to bring a deputation to Committee.
Further complaint was made regarding the emails in which those members
explained their actions to the complainant. The fact that both the members
concerned had made efforts to communicate in a detailed way with the complainant
was noted while no part of the complaint was considered to give rise to
sufficient evidence that a breach had occurred. A decision was made to take no
further action as a result.
5.5
Complaints W/2022 and X/2022 were from different
complainants but concerned the same ward member. The complaint alleged that the
member’s responses to them on a ward matter had breached the Code. Both
complaints remain with the Independent Person at time of writing and a decision
has not as yet been made at preliminary assessment stage.
5.6
Complaint Y/2022 made substantively the same allegation as was
made in U/2022 but purported to provide additional evidence in support.
This is being reviewed at time of writing. Complaint Z2022 was received
in very shortly before publication of this Report and made allegations
concerning a member’s activities at and in relation to proposals in the
member’s ward. It remains at preliminary assessment stage and will be referred
to in a future report, along with all other outstanding complaints.
6
Member development and training
6.1
To assist the Committee in discharging its role in promoting and
maintaining high standards of conduct by councillors, attention is drawn to the
member training sessions taking place during the month of November 2022. These
include a refresher session to enable members to recap on the Council’s
standards arrangements including the updates made in summer 2021.
6.2
Also occurring this month is the second of two training sessions
delivered by an external trainer on the use of social media. It will highlight the
challenges and opportunities for members who use social media and will offer
some assistance on how to deal with those stakeholders who fail to meet minimal
standards of courtesy and respect when approaching members.
6.3
A third training event has been run for members of the Audit and
Standards Committee only. This provides them with an opportunity to undertake
the training deemed mandatory for any member participating in a Standards
Panel.
7
Analysis and consideration of alternative
options
7.1
The Council is obliged under the Localism Act to
make arrangements for maintaining high standards of conduct among members and
to make arrangements for the investigation of complaints. The current
arrangements and the proposals in this Report are key to discharging these
requirements. No alternative proposals are suggested.
8
Community engagement and consultation
8.1
No need to consult with the local community has
been identified.
9
Conclusion
9.1
This Report aims to assist the Committee in
discharging its responsibilities for overseeing the standards of conduct at
this authority and for reviewing the arrangements in place for the resolution
of member complaints.
10 Financial implications
10.1
There are no additional financial implications
arising from the recommendation in this report. All activity referred to has
been, or will be, met from existing budgets.
Name of finance officer
consulted: Nigel Manvell Date consulted 3/11/22
11.1
These are covered in the body of the Report.
Name of lawyer consulted:
Victoria Simpson Date consulted 31/10/22
12.1
No equalities implications have been identified.
13.1
No sustainability implications have been
identified.
14 Other Implications
Supporting Documentation
None