Issue - meetings
Standards Advisory Committee - Membership, Terms of Reference and Programme of Meetings 2012 -13
Meeting: 21/10/2014 - Standards Advisory Committee (Item 3)
3 Code of Conduct for Members - Complaints and Investigation Monitoring PDF 107 KB
To note the complaints and investigation monitoring information contained in this report.
Minutes:
Meic Sullivan-Gould (Interim Monitoring Officer [IMO]) introduced and highlighted key points in the report, which:
· Reported on the number and nature of complaints received about alleged failures to comply with the Code of Conduct for Members, and action taken as a result for the information of the SAC, in accordance with the arrangements for dealing with such complaints agreed by the full Council.
· Advised of reporting requirements, under the arrangements, in cases where the Monitoring Officer (MO) extends the time period of investigations into complaints from 2 to 3 months.
Points highlighted by Meic Sullivan-Gould included:-
· His intention that the current backlog of long outstanding complaints [of failures to comply with the Code of Conduct for Members] should be concluded later in 2014 and that because of much work undertaken by Mark Norman (Legal Services) with the exception of 1 complaint these were ready to progress to an Investigation and Disciplinary Sub-Committee (IDSC) of the SAC, the arrangements for which (and related mandatory training) were now being finalised. .
· The exception was complaint IDSC02/2013 which had recently been identified as requiring progression and conclusion, and which had slipped through the net due to the responsible officer leaving the Authority’s employ in March. He had now reviewed the case, and it was now being progressed in accordance with the arrangements.
· There had been no new complaints since he had joined the Authority’s employ in January 2014 which required processing under the arrangements.
A comprehensive discussion followed which focused on the following points:-
· Comment that given the investigation of a complaint about Member conduct was very stressful for the subject of the investigation. Accordingly when the Council had discussed the arrangements for dealing with such complaints as a corporate body [September 2013], it had considered that where a complaint was referred for investigation, it was preferable for such an investigation to be completed within 1 month, but agreed a requirement for completion within 2 months, with provision for a further extension of 1 month [by the MO] but also agreed a process for this. It was not therefore unreasonable to expect investigations to be completed within 3 months, however the duration of several investigations set out in the report were much longer (3 over a year and 1 of 18 months). There was also certainty that the investigation report relating to a complaint lodged by a SAC member had been received by the Authority 5 months previously. Accordingly consideration that:-
o It appeared little effort was being made to progress complaints through the process, and the process for extension of investigations by the MO was not being adhered to.
o It was disrespectful to Members for complaints not to be completed in a timely way.
o It was necessary for the SAC to express displeasure over the unacceptable duration of investigations, and for the SAC Chair to take a personal interest in the progression of complaints requiring investigation, as this could not be allowed to continue.
Meic Sullivan-Gould acknowledged that the comments/ ... view the full minutes text for item 3