Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority Item 10

31 May, 2006

Appointment of Committees, Chairmen and Vice-Chairmenships, Deputies and Other Appointments

Report of the Clerk

Contact: Mr. K. Ridout. (01962) 847356.

1 Summary

1.1 This report seeks approval to the proportional allocation of members to the Authority's Finance and General Purposes, Governance, Human Resources, Performance Review and Standards Committees, to the appointment of members and deputies to serve on each, the appointment of their respective Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen and to various other appointments. It also deals with the role of independent members and in particular whether or not the Standards Committee shall be chaired by an independent member.

2 Size and Political Composition of Committees

2.1 Following the recent Portsmouth and Southampton City Council elections, the political composition of the Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority is expected to remain as before with 13 Conservative, 9 Liberal Democrat and 3 Labour. From the County Council, there have been no changes notified to the Clerk. Portsmouth City Council have re-appointed Councillors D. Horne and H. Jones and appointed Councillor L. Hunt in place of Councillor Mrs E. Baker. As Southampton City Council have an equal number of seats between the three main political parties, they are expected to appoint a Conservative, a Liberal Democrat and a Labour Member to the Fire Authority. However, at the time of this report being issued no names have as yet been notified to the Clerk. The names of the Hampshire County and Portsmouth City Council members now serving on the HFRA appears as Appendix 1.

2.2 The political proportionality of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 applies to the Authority. This requires, inter-alia, that where one political group has an overall majority, that group must have a majority on any Committee.

2.3 The number of seats on the Authority's existing Committees is set out below and it is proposed that this remain unchanged.

Committees Conservative Liberal Democrat Labour Group
Group Group

Finance and General
Purposes 6 4 1

Human Resources 6 4 1

Performance Review 5 3 1

Governance 5 3 1

Standards 3 2 1

(plus 3 Independent Members)

3 Independent Members and Chairmanship of the Standards Committee

3.1 The Standards Committee on 9 December 2005 considered a report by the Clerk about the role of independent members on the Standards Committee. The report appears as Appendix 3. In addition to dealing with the number of independent members to serve on the Standards Committee, which has subsequently been increased by the Authority from two to three (with Mrs W. Allen, Mr M. James and Miss S. Roberts being appointed until February 2010), the report questions whether or not independent members should Chair meetings of the Standards Committee. Members of that Committee acknowledged that whereas an independent member Chairman may enhance public perception of the Committee and its work, it may have the effect of preventing Councillors from considering that they fully own the process. The Committee have asked the Clerk to raise this issue for discussion at the Annual Meeting of the Authority.

3.2 The Standards Board for England, whilst not having issued formal guidance on this, have commented that although there is no requirement under current legislation for an independent member to Chair the Standards Committee, it is in their opinion good practice to do so. In their view, it promotes confidence in local arrangements and sends out a strong signal to the public and to the Authority's own members.

3.3 For the time being the Authority may wish to continue as at present by appointing a Councillor Member as Chairman of the Standards Committee for a further year. Of the three current independent members serving on the Fire Authority both Mrs. W. Allen and Miss S. Roberts have indicated that they would not be interested to undertake a Chairmanship role. Mr. M. James is a new independent member having only been in office for three months. The Government has indicated a future intention to introduce legislation to require Standards Committees to be chaired by an independent member.

4 Appointment of Deputies

4.1 The Authority's Standing Orders normally require each Committee to include one member from each of the constituent authorities. In respect of the two Cities, where they have had only one representative on a Committee, it has been the practice to appoint a deputy. Notwithstanding this, currently there is no Portsmouth member on the Standards Committee. The Authority may wish to take this into consideration in making their appointments. The former membership of the five Committees, as previously appointed, appears as Appendix 2.

5 Other Authority Appointments

5.1 The Fairness and Dignity Group - This Group comprises Fire Service Management staff and union representatives and deals with issues of equality etc. within the Fire Service. Meetings are normally held bi-monthly and on a rotation basis at different fire stations across Hampshire. The local HFRA member is invited to attend those Fairness and Dignity meetings held in their particular area.

5.2 The Authority is asked to re-appoint members and deputies to this Group.

5.3 Community Fire Safety - Strategic Steering Group - This is a cross-party steering group that meets at Service Headquarters on a regular basis. It oversees the development of a Community Fire Safety Strategy in HFRA, monitors the performance of the service through the use of Performance Indicators and also provides a forum for Members to remain updated on current and future developments within Community Fire Safety. The Group comprises of Fire Service Management staff, a teaching advisor, union representatives and members of the Authority.

5.4 The Authority is asked to re-appoint members and deputies to this Group.

5.5 Corporate Management Team - The Authority has previously agreed that leading members (the Chairman, two Vice-Chairmen, Chairman of Human Resources Committee and spokesmen for the two minority political groups would meet as a preliminary sounding board with senior officers to develop polices, plans and recommendations for subsequent presentation to the Authority. This informal working group - called the Corporate Management Team (CMT) - was originally established to make progress with the Authority's Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP). It has also been used as a useful cross-party group to discuss and deal with matters of urgency. It is recommended that the Corporate Management Team continues as before.

5.6 The Authority is asked to nominate 2 Liberal Democrat and 1 Labour Member spokesmen for the minority political groups on CMT.

5.7 Crime and Disorder Partnerships - The Authority by way of the Clerk, in consultation with the Chairman, has appointed one of its members to serve on each of the 13 partnerships currently operated by the 11 district and 2 unitary authorities in Hampshire. They are seen as an important way to achieve and improve the delivery of "joined-up" services to the local community and enable resources to be targeted using the most appropriate skills.

5.8 The Authority is asked to re-appoint members to the 13 Crime and Disorder Partnerships.

6 European Convention of Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998

6.1 The proposals within this report are compatible with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

(i) That, for the purposes of Part 1 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, the allocation of seats on the Finance and General Purposes, Governance, Human Resources, Performance Review and Standards Committees of the Authority, be as set out in Paragraph 2.3 of the report.

(ii) That a Councillor Member be appointed as Chairman of the Standards Committee and that the position as to whether an independent member shall assume this role in the future be reviewed at the Annual Meeting of the Authority in 2007.

(iii) That, the Authority re-appoint members of the Finance and General Purposes, Governance, Human Resources, Performance Review and Standards Committees and their respective Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen, as necessary.

(iv) That the Fairness and Dignity Group be re-appointed on same basis as previously.

(v) That the Community Fire Safety - Strategic Steering Group be re-appointed on same basis as previously.

(vi) That the Clerk be notified by the Members appointed in paragraphs 5.2 and 5.4 of their respective deputies to attend a particular meeting, if required.

(vii) That the Authority appoint one member to each of the 13 Crime and Disorder Partnerships currently operated by the 11 districts and 2 unitary authorities in Hampshire on same basis as previously.

(viii) That the Corporate Management Team of leading Members continue as previously; the Team to comprise the Chairman, two Vice-Chairmen, Chairman of Human Resources Committee, two Liberal Democrat Members and the Labour Member spokesman.

4gR090506

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

Appendix 1

Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority

Membership

Appendix 2

PREVIOUS COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

4gR090506

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 County Council. This statutory minimum has been exceeded by a number of local authorities and 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 County Council that current arrangements be changed.

2 Background

2.1 In setting up the Executive style of local governance, 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 County Council therefore advertised for people who would be interested in fulfilling this role on the Standards Committee and members were duly appointed by the Council for a four year term expiring in February 2006. The County Council has therefore always been fully compliant with the statutory requirements in this regard.

2.2 However, since the establishment of Standards Committees some local 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 local 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 County Council 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 Council's 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 have to be taken forward through to the Governance Committee and the full Council. 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

· Strengthens the role of independent members;

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

· May enhance public perception about independent scrutiny of the standards of conduct at the County Council;

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

Against


· Independent members are not democratically elected;

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

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

· 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 the County 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, first of all to the Governance Committee and ultimately to the County Council itself.

5 Recommendation

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