Agenda item

The Committee received and noted the Monitoring Officer’s annual report about decisions taken on standards allegations against borough and parish councillors for the 12-month period ending 31 December 2022.

Throughout thisperiod, therehad been a total of four complaints received - two relating to borough councillors, and two relating to parish councillors. There were also three complaints which had started in 2021.

The two complaints against borough councillors referred to above were rejectedat stage1 fornot providingany substantiating information. Two of the three complaints from 2021 had proceeded to stage 6, Hearings Sub-Committee.

As at the end of December 2022, there were three ongoing complaints (two against parish councillors, and one against a borough councillor).

The origin of the complaints(whether from members ofthe public, officers, or elected members of the authority) was set out in Appendix 1 to the report. Thetime takenfor consideration anddetermination of acomplaint was also setout in Appendix 1.

By way of comparison and to put the statistical information on the number of complaints received into context, the Committee noted that the number of misconduct allegations received by the Monitoring Officer over the past three years was as follows: 

The report had also set out details of the consideration by the Corporate Governance Task Group of a review of the extent to which outcomes of misconduct complaints against councillors should be published.

The Council’s current Arrangementsprovide that the identity of all councillors against whom a misconduct complaint has been made remains anonymous, except for those whose complaint is referred to the Hearings Sub-Committee for determination.  A copy of the current Arrangements is attached, for information, at Appendix 2.

Following a request last year by the then Chairman of this Committee, Councillor George Potter, the Corporate Governance Task Group, at its meeting on 20 February 2023, considered a report on the extent to which outcomes of misconduct complaints against councillors should be published.

The Task Group noted the various stages of a misconduct complaint, as set out in the Arrangements, where there could be an “outcome”, which were as follows:

·        The Monitoring Officer (MO) could discontinue a complaint or terminate an investigation in certain circumstances (see paras 5.1 and 5.2 of the Arrangements).

·        The complaint may fail the initial jurisdiction test (Stage 1) – section 6 of the Arrangements.

·        The complaint may, following initial assessment (Stage 2), be subject to an Informal Resolution (Stage 3) – sections 7 and 8 of the Arrangements.

·        The complaint may, following formal investigation, be terminated because the Investigating Officer finds no breach of the Code (Stages 4 and 5) - sections 9 and 10 of the Arrangements.

·        The Investigating Officer may, during formal investigation of the complaint, identify criminal conduct by the subject member (the councillor against whom the complaint was made) (see paras 19 and 20 of Appendix 2 to the Arrangements), in which case the MO would suspend the investigation pending the outcome of any separate Police investigation. 

·        Following formal investigation and referral to the Hearings Sub-Committee (Stage 6), the outcome of the complaint may be that there has been no breach of the code and no further action taken, or that there has been a breach and appropriate sanction(s) have been determined.

The Task Group noted that the Arrangements for dealing with misconduct complaints published by the other Surrey councils, generally followed Guildford’s approach regarding publishing outcomes – i.e. that no specific information about the identity of the Subject Member or the nature of the complaint against them are published, except at the formal standards hearing stage.

The Task Group had considered whether there was a case to publish the identity of a Subject Member and details of the complaint against them, at any stage in the process other than when it was referred to the Hearings Sub-Committee.  The Task Group felt that any change to the Arrangements to provide for publication of details of Informal Resolutions might have the effect of deterring councillors from agreeing to them, and hence a greater number of complaints being referred for a formal investigation, which would be both time-consuming and costly. The Task Group therefore concluded that no changes should be made to the Arrangements to provide for public disclosure of outcomes of misconduct complaints against councillors, other than when they were referred to the Hearings Sub-Committee following formal investigation.

The Task Group was content with the existing arrangements for publication on the website of a decision notice setting out the findings at a Hearings Sub-Committee with full disclosure of the identity of the Subject Member, and the details of the complaint.  It was noted, however, that decision notices were currently published with the Hearings Sub-Committee papers.  It was suggested, for added transparency, that such decision notices, along with a link to the relevant committee papers should also be published on the specific webpages dealing with Councillor Conduct.

It was also suggested that the table in Appendix 1 to the report showing details of complaints received, and decisions taken in relation to Allegations of Misconduct against Borough Councillors and Parish Councillors under the Arrangements, for the previous calendar year should also be posted on the Councillor Conduct webpages referred to above, and updated at least twice yearly as appropriate by the Monitoring Officer showing decisions taken in respect of those complaints, and  new complaints received.

The task group also requested the Councillor conduct webpages to include links to the latest Monitoring Officer Annual Report to the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee.

The Task Group had also suggested minor amendments to add clarity to two paragraphs within Appendix 1 to the Arrangements (Communications Policy in relation to Member Complaints), details of which were set out in the report.

The Task Group had decided that, at its next meeting on 27 March 2023, it would like to review the wording of the Arrangements as a whole and make recommendations for any changes to this Committee and to full Council, noting that any such recommendations would be considered following the Borough Council elections in May.  The suggested amendments to the Arrangements referred to above would be picked up in this review process.

The following points were raised by the Committee in the debate:

·       Concern over the lengthy timescales built into the Arrangements which meant that complaints often took more than a year to deal with.

·       General concern over the length of time taken for investigations into complaints to be completed.

Having considered the report, the Committee

RESOLVED:

(1)   That the cases referred to the Monitoring Officer under the Council’s arrangements for dealing with allegations of misconduct by councillors for the period 1 January to 31 December 2022, be noted.

(2)   That the MonitoringOfficer be asked to note and follow-up the following area ofconcern uponwhich further work would be carried out:

·       Concern over the lengthy timescales built into the Arrangements which meant that complaints often took more than a year to deal with.

(3)   That no changes be made to the public disclosure arrangements for dealing with allegations of misconduct by councillors and co-opted members i.e. only to disclose the outcome after referrals to the Hearings Sub-Committee following formal investigation.

(4)   That decision notices following determination of a complaint by the Hearings Sub-Committee be published on the Councillor Conduct webpages on the Council’s website, together with a link to the relevant committee pages.

(5)   That the table in Appendix 1 to the report submitted to the Committee showing details of complaints received, and decisions taken in relation to Allegations of Misconduct against Borough Councillors and Parish Councillors under the Arrangements, for the previous calendar year be posted on the Councillor Conduct webpages and updated as appropriate by the Monitoring Officer at least twice per year to show decisions taken in respect of those complaints, and new complaints received.

(6)   That links to the latest Monitoring Officer Annual Report to the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee be included in the Councillor conduct webpages.

Reasons:

·       To ensuremembers ofthe Committeeand othersto whomthe reportis circulated are updated as to complaints received and to enable them to consider learning points for the future.

·       To seek topromote andmaintain highstandards ofconduct amongst Members.

·       To ensure as far as possible, the openness and transparency of the councillor complaints procedure

·       To respond to recommendations of the Corporate Governance Task Group.