Contact: Jeff Pattison, ext 7321

1 Summary

1.1 Under the provisions of the Local Government Act 2000 the Standards Committee must contain at least 25% of its members who are independent of the Authority. This statutory minimum has been exceeded by a number of local authorities. Furthermore, at the last count approximately half of local authorities appointed an independent member as the Chairman of the Committee. The numbers of independent members of Standards Committees and whether or not they should automatically chair meetings has been the subject of discussion most recently at the Standards Board National Conference, which took place in Birmingham on 5 and 6 September 2005. This report therefore gives members the opportunity to discuss these two issues and whether or not they would recommend to the Authority that current arrangements be changed.

2 Background

2.1 The Local Government Act 2000 required all authorities to establish a Standards Committee with one of their main roles being to promote and maintain high standards of conduct by all members of the authority. In establishing Standards Committees at least 25% of the membership were required to be independent members. This essentially meant people who were not otherwise connected to the local government family and so excluded members of other local authorities or public bodies. The Authority therefore advertised for people who would be interested in fulfilling this role on the Standards Committee and members were duly appointed by the Authority for a four year term expiring in February 2006. The Authority has therefore always been fully compliant with the statutory requirements in this regard.

2.2 However, since the establishment of Standards Committees some authorities have gone beyond the statutory minimum requirements and appointed a number of independent members which exceeds the minimum of 25%. In some cases more than 50% of the members of the Standards Committee are "independent of the parent authority or indeed any other local authority". In addition some local authorities have appointed one of their independent members as the chairperson of the Standards Committee.

2.3 One of the expressed reasons for going beyond the minimum statutory requirements is to give greater confidence to the public that the important issue of Standards is being dealt with by a body which, it can be said, is more truly independent of the Authority itself. In addition to this the Standards Board for England, whilst not having issued formal guidance on the issue, have commented that although there is no requirement under the legislation for an independent member to chair the Standards Committee, it is in their opinion good practice for an independent member to do so. In their opinion this promotes confidence in the local arrangements and sends out a strong signal to the public and to the Authorities own members.

2.4 The only advice that the Standards Board gives regarding the number of independent members is that there should be at least two. They say this to avoid the potential for a small Standards Committee of say three members, two of which would need to be Councillors and one would need to be an independent member. It is felt that a lone independent member in these circumstances might become isolated and ineffective. The Standards Board also suggests that independent members should be:-

a. familiar with ethical dilemmas;

b. experienced with committee work;

c. able to question effectively;

d. assertive; and

e. independent of any political party and local government.

2.5 It is also becoming apparent that the Audit Commission in their assessment of the ethical governance of local authorities will, if an authority is to satisfy level 3 (out of 4) of the assessment, need to answer yes to the question "Is your Standards Committee chaired by an independent member?". In one sense this is very disappointing because it indicates that the Audit Commission as a non-elected body are dictating not only what must be done, but how it should be done. It also implies a mistrust on the part of Councillors to be able to undertake this role effectively bearing in mind the role itself is likely to be heavily scrutinised, especially in the instance of misconduct cases being heard, by the press and media.

3 The issues to be considered

3.1 In view of the above, the time now seems opportune for the Committee to consider whether or not it would be in favour of an increase in the number of independent members and if so to what extent. The independent members were appointed for a four year term expiring in February 2006. If, therefore, members considered that independent representation should be increased, then this would need to be a recommendation to the Authority. This could be undertaken in the context of the recruitment of the independent members for, presumably, the next four year term.

3.2 Very briefly, the arguments for and against an increase in independent representation would be as follows:-

For

o Strengthens the role of independent members;

o May result in them being less isolated and more effective;

o May enhance public perception about independent scrutiny of the standards of conduct at the Authority;

o If independent members became a majority on the Committee, would effectively place the statutory Standards Committee functions on an independent base.

Against

o Independent members are not democratically elected;

o Although independent members ideally are not connected to a political party, that is not to say that they do not have political views;

o To have a majority of independent members on the Committee may result in Councillors not feeling that they own the process;

o Lack of weight may be given to Standards Committee deliberations if they are considered to be a non democratically elected body with insufficient knowledge of Councillors roles and responsibilities.

3.3 The other issue is whether or not the Standards Committee should be chaired by an independent member and this could be in the context either of membership remaining as it is or it being increased by additional independent members.

3.4 The issues here are similar to those regarding the numbers of independent members. For instance, an independent member Chairman of the Standards Committee may enhance public perception of the Standards Committee and its work, but it could also have the effect of Councillors not considering that they fully own the process. It is accepted, however, that this is less likely to be an issue if the existing membership of Standards Committee remains the same.

4 Conclusion

4.1 The purpose of this report is simply to raise the two issues for debate by the Standards Committee about the numbers of independent members on the Standards Committee and whether the Committee should be chaired by an independent member. If a change is desired then members are asked to consider whether they would wish to recommend an appropriate change to the Authority.

5 Recommendation

That the Committee consider the current membership of the Standards Committee and whether a change in the numbers of independent members should be recommended to the Authority, and also whether or not the Standards Committee should be chaired by an independent member.

Section 100D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose the facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

N.B. The list excludes:

1. Published works.


2. Documents that disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE FILE

None