Archived decisions

ITEM 2

AT A MEETING of the STANDARDS COMMITTEE of the HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL held at The Castle, Winchester on 28 October 2003.

PRESENT:

Councillors: C.R.H. Davidovitz (Chairman); Mrs. S.E. Allbright; Mrs. C.A. Leversha; A.W. Rice, TD; W.H. Wheeler.

Independent Members : Mr. J. Chester; Dr. B. Spender

Also present: Councillor J.K. West, Chairman of Regulatory Committee

69 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Members were mindful that, where they believed they had a personal or personal prejudicial interest in any matter to be considered at the meeting, they should, normally at the time of the debate, declare their interest and, having regard to the circumstances described in paragraphs 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the County Council's Code of Conduct, consider whether to leave the meeting whilst the matter was discussed. Councillors Davidovitz and Mrs. Allbright both declared an interest in Item 9 (Minute 77) as Members of the Regulatory Committee although they had taken no part in the discussion of this item. The Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer advised that Members need not treat this as a prejudicial interest and could remain in the meeting, speak and vote during the course of the relevant debate.

70 MINUTES

The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 29 July 2003 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman. The Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer gave Members an update on progress: proposals for scrutiny were still being developed by Senior Members and once finalised would be brought to the Standards Committee for any recommended changes to the Constitution; on Minute 62, it had emerged from approaches to the Ombudsman that of seventeen other county councils listed none was replying within the deadline of fifteen days and indeed, Hampshire County Council was the most prompt to reply. In the light of that the Ombudsman was being asked to review whether the deadline was realistic. In conclusion he reported that the recommended changes to Members' allowances had been adopted by the County Council, with the exception that annual increases should be linked to the National Local Government pay award, not to Hampshire Management Grade pay increase.

71 CHAIRMAN'S COMMUNICATIONS

The Chairman gave a brief introduction on his background to the Committee and welcomed Councillor Mrs. Leversha as the other new Member.

72 DEPUTATIONS

There were no deputations notified on this occasion.

73 PROCEDURE FOR COMPLAINTS FORWARDED BY THE STANDARDS BOARD FOR THE STANDARDS COMMITTEE FOR DETERMINATION

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer (Item 5 in the Minute Book) on proposed procedure for dealing with complaints of misconduct made to the Standards Board and forwarded by them to the Standards Committee for hearing and determination. They also had before them appendices to the document which were circulated subsequently. It was reported that a further set of Regulations was still expected from the Government which might allow for less significant complaints to be referred direct by the Standards Board for investigation locally. Members endorsed the logic of the proposed structure whereby a pre-hearing procedure, to be agreed between the monitoring officer and the Head of Democratic Services, would establish the extent to which the facts on a complaint were agreed or disputed between the parties; the Committee would then decide if there had been a breach of the Code of Conduct; and if so, they would decide what penalty to impose. So far there had been no complaints relating to Hampshire County Councillors referred by the Standards Board for hearing and determination. Members expressed concerns at the likely workload and budget implications if complaints were referred for hearing and determination, or indeed for local investigation. There remained in any event the ability, already used once by the Committee, to investigate locally less serious complaints which did not constitute breaches of the Code of Conduct.

RESOLVED:

That approval be given to the adoption of the model hearing procedure contained in appendix 2 of the guidance notes produced by the Standards Board for England for those complaints which have been investigated and reported on by the Standards Board and remitted to the Standards Committee for hearing and determination.

74 SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer (Item 6 in the Minute Book) recommending one minor correction to be made to the Constitution.

RESOLVED:

That it be a RECOMMENDATION to the County Council:

That Part 1, Chapter 10, paragraph 10.2 of the Constitution be amended to read as follows:

75 HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE ACT 2001 - DIRECTIONS TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES (OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEES, HEALTH SCRUTINY FUNCTIONS)

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Executive (Item 7 in the Minute Book) on proposed arrangements for a joint committee with delegated powers to be established to consider any proposals from the NHS for substantial variations or development in the delivery of services which are provided across Local Authority areas. It was reported that the report had been approved by the Health Review Committee that morning, insofar as their responsibilities were concerned. Members generally endorsed the proposals as a practical way forward in providing a prompt joint response to NHS consultations on behalf of the County Council and its neighbours.

RESOLVED:

That it be a RECOMMENDATION to the County Council

That Part 2, Chapter 1, paragraph 1.3 of the Constitution be amended to enable:

· the Health Review Committee to delegate health scrutiny powers to a joint committee and appoint Members when there is an intention by an NHS body to consult on a substantial variation or development to health services that extend beyond the area covered by Hampshire County Council


· the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Chairman of the Health Review Committee, may agree to the formation of such a committee, its membership and terms of reference, if there is insufficient time for that decision to be taken by the Health Review Committee subject to the details being submitted for approval to the next meeting of the Health Review Committee


· any joint committee so convened would work to a specific proposal and with clear terms of reference, which would be restricted to consideration of and agreeing a response to the proposal on which the committee had been consulted.

76 DEPUTATIONS

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer (Item 8 in the Minute Book) on several practical issues arising from the deputation procedure adopted by the County Council. The Committee gave particular consideration to the most effective way of handling meetings where there were large numbers of deputations and the possibility that the time needed might extend beyond the hour allowed. They also considered the possibility that Members of deputations might live just across the county boundary, or might be school/college students who were under eighteen and therefore not on the electoral register; and also the possibility that it might emerge at the meeting itself that deputation Members might be elected Parish Councillors or District Councillors and who should, therefore, be excluded. They did not feel it was necessary to make any formal amendment to Standing Order 21 to cover these situations, and they took the view that Chairmen of Committees or Panels should continue to have the discretion to use reasonable flexibility and pragmatism to deal effectively and sympathetically with the numbers and membership of deputations. Chairmen would, therefore, be encouraged to avoid rigid adherence to the terms of the Standing Order when practical considerations indicated that was appropriate, given the overall aim of ensuring that the voice of the public was heard.

With regard to the six month rule set out in Standing Order 21(f), the Committee accepted the need for clarification as recommended, but suggested that an exemption was needed to cover the particular circumstances of the Regulatory Committee in determining planning applications. The deputation procedure also needed to be reconciled with the Code of Conduct for Councillors and Officers dealing with planning matters referred to in Item 9 below (Minute 77 refers), to make it clear that elected Members of Parish and District Councils could take part in deputations in a personal capacity on specific planning matters in their locality.

RESOLVED:

(i) That Chairmen of committees and panels be encouraged to use their discretion to offer reasonable flexibility and pragmatism regarding the numbers and membership of deputations and that the County Council's Fact sheet on the deputation procedure be amended to reflect the discretion available to the Chairman.


(ii) That it be a RECOMMENDATION to the County Council:

That Standing Order 21(f) be amended to read as follows:


(f) Any deputation which has appeared before the Council, or at any
committee, sub-committee or panel established by the Council,
shall not reappear at any such meeting within a period of six
months on the same or similar topic (except in the case of a
deputation to the Regulatory Committee when it is exercising a
planning function, in which case a deputation may reappear
where an item is adjourned, or when there is another similar
planning application submitted in respect of the same site).


(iii) That in considering specific planning applications, the practice of the Regulatory Committee be endorsed in giving precedence to the provisions of the local Code of Conduct for Councillors and Officers dealing with planning matters


· currently, as adopted by the former Planning and Transportation Committee on 25 January 1999;


· for the future, as approved by the County Council in the light of the recommendation on Item 9 below (Minute 77 refers) to be adopted with effect from 1 January 2004, and any similar code which may subsequently be adopted by the County Council;


wherever these differ from the County Council's Standing Orders, and that accordingly elected Members of Parish and District Councils be allowed to make deputations in a personal capacity upon specific planning matters in their locality.

77 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE LOCAL CODE OF CONDUCT FOR COUNCILLORS AND OFFICERS DEALING WITH PLANNING MATTERS

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer (Item 9 in the Minute Book) on proposed revisions to the local Code of Conduct known as the Planning Probity Code. It was reported that the code had been duly approved by the Regulatory Committee. Members noted the important changes proposed on the way in which site visits were conducted by Members of the Regulatory Committee. The vital principle was that any comments or views made by any parties should relate solely to the physical and visual characteristics of the site which was the subject of a planning application. Should Members or any other parties wish to make representations on the merits or otherwise of the planning application, then the appropriate way to do so was by means of making a formal deputation to the Regulatory Committee when it considered the planning application. This would ensure fairness in that the entire membership of the Regulatory Committee, including any who might not have been able to attend a site visit, were aware of all representations that had been made by the applicants or the public, including any objectors, before they made their final determination. The Chairman of the Regulatory Committee indicated that he would ensure the detailed procedures set out in the code were followed, to ensure that the status of any site visit was made clearly known to all participants.

RESOLVED:

That, it be a RECOMMENDATION to the County Council:

That the revised local Code of Conduct for Councillors and Officers dealing with planning matters, as contained in the appendix to the report, be approved and adopted with effect from 1 January 2004.

78 ANNUAL REPORT ON CORPORATE COMPLAINTS MONITORING 2002/03

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Executive (Item 10 in the Minute Book) setting out information on complaints handling in all departments of the County Council, following consideration by the respective Policy Review Committees. Members generally felt that the numbers of complaints were modest when compared with the scale of the County Council's operations and the number of staff and customers involved. They considered there might be scope for more systematic and effective recording of compliments as well as complaints, to give a more rounded picture of the views which the public have of the County Council's services. They endorsed the importance of using complaints as the stimulus to further action and improvement.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee notes the satisfactory arrangements for scrutiny of complaints and complaints monitoring and commends the Policy Review Committees and the departmental management teams for vigorous reporting and consideration of complaints monitoring information.

79 INDEPENDENT APPEAL PANEL MEMBERS - TRAVELLING ALLOWANCES

The Committee considered a report of the Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer (Item 11 in the Minute Book) on a possible variation to the decision recently taken by the County Council on travelling allowances, insofar as they relate to Independent Appeal Panel Members.

RESOLVED:

That it be a RECOMMENDATION to the County Council:

That motor vehicle allowances for Independent Appeal Panel Members be reinstated at 48.5p per mile and that the allowances be increased annually in line with the rate of increase for staff travel allowances.

80 DATES FOR 2004

The Committee noted the schedule of dates for the meetings during 2004 as follows:

Tuesday, 27 January - 2.15 p.m.
Tuesday, 6 April - 10 a.m. (amended date)
Tuesday, 27 July - 2.15 p.m.
Tuesday, 26 October - 2.15 p.m.

81 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The Committee considered the report of the County Treasurer (Item 13 in the Minute Book) on the developing arrangements for corporate governance within the County Council. Members noted the rules and procedures for ensuring compliance, and were advised that suitable action was being taken where any gaps had been identified, with the aim of presenting a new statement of assurance at the end of the financial year.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee notes the progress and approves the approach adopted to monitoring compliance with the Code of Corporate Governance, on the basis set out in the submitted report.

82 INTERNAL AUDIT PROGRESS

The Committee considered the report of the County Treasurer (Item 14 in the Minute Book) on progress with the internal audit plan and other significant issues arising from internal audit. In response to questions, the County Treasurer explained the distinction between the roles of the Standards Committee and the Policy Review Committees: the former was mainly responsible for the review of controls in force, whereas the latter were more concerned with decision-making and policy development. However, there was no reason why issues of concern identified by Policy Review Committees, or by any scrutiny select committees, could not be drawn to the attention of Standards Committee and vice versa.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee notes the progress of internal audit work during 2003/04 and notes the key issues arising from that work, as summarised in the submitted report.

83 EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

RESOLVED:

That by virtue of the paragraph 14 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of confidential Appendix B.

84 INTERNAL AUDIT PROGRESS (CONFIDENTIAL)

The Committee considered confidential Appendix B to the County Treasurer's report arising from Item 14 (Minute 82 above refers). They noted with interest the issues identified and the corrective action being taken.

5jM981003