Contact: Jeff Pattison, tel 01962 845330, email [email protected]

1 Background

1.1 At the meetings of the Governance and Standards Committees on 28 June and 25 July 2006 a report was considered on Ethical Governance at the County Council following a survey undertaken of members by the Audit Commission.

1.2 Unfortunately, only 11 of the 78 members responded to the survey which was insufficient, statistically, to validate any of the conclusions. Both Committees considered that the survey, and particularly the conclusions to be drawn from it, were sufficiently important for the exercise to be repeated so that any lessons could be learned. The Committees therefore asked the Monitoring Officer to refine and repeat the survey in the Autumn of 2006 with a request that all members complete it.

1.3 I am pleased to say that members have responded positively to this request, with 45 having responded. This is clearly a much improved response rate which can be relied upon as a measure of member understanding of the Code of Conduct. The primary intention behind the survey was to identify any gaps in members awareness of ethical issues and therefore as a pointer to future training needs.

1.4 A copy of the survey results can be obtained from the Head of Corporate and Legal Services.

2 Key messages from the survey

It needs to be borne in mind that not all members responded to all questions and therefore when percentages are given they may not total 100%, as the non-responses have been taken into account in the overall picture.

3 Code of Conduct

Around 90% of respondents were very or fairly clear about reporting a breach of the Code, their responsibilities under it and the guidelines regarding their personal conduct, although one member was not aware that the Council had adopted a Code or that they had personally agreed to abide by it.

4 Standards Committee

Although 90% of respondents understood the role of the Standards Committee, only slightly over 50% considered that it made a positive difference to the ethical environment in the Council and added value, whereas on these latter two points about 30% (14 respondents) considered that it did not.

5 Whistleblowing

A majority of respondents 58% (26) either did not think that the Council had a whistleblowing policy or did not know, whereas the minority who were aware of such a policy thought it clear or very clear.

6 Training

6.1 When asked whether appropriate training is given to members on issues of conduct 89% either agreed or strongly agreed that it was, with 4.4% (2 respondents) disagreeing and 6.7% (3 respondents) not knowing.

6.2 There was a less positive response given in response to the question as to whether training, advice, information was given in other areas of

7 Conflicts of Interest

A significant number of respondents (over 90%) were clear about what a conflict of interest was and also the distinction between a personal and prejudicial interest, with only 2 respondents indicating that they were `fairly unclear' about this latter distinction. However, all respondents were aware that if they had a prejudicial interest they would need to withdraw from the meeting room.

8 Register of Interests

8.1 Members were fully aware that a Register was kept and that they were reminded to keep their entries up to date and also to record any gifts or hospitality received.

8.2 However, respondents were less clear about the need to record specific interests which they had and which required to be recorded.

9 Leadership

9.1 There was generally a very positive response to a series of questions on the role of members and their interaction with officers, in terms of honesty and integrity, listening to advice, not interfering in operational issues and not discriminating against either officers or the recipients of Council Services. As a notable exception to this, however, a significant proportion of members (31% or 14 respondents) did consider that officers were inappropriately involved in party political issues. It is fair to say, though, that this response could be partly due to the question being somewhat obtuse and involving double negatives.

9.2 Respondents also considered that the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive were positive role models and proactive in terms of promoting the ethical agenda.

10 Communications

10.1 A high proportion of respondents (around 80%) considered that communications between members, themselves and also officers was usually or always both open and constructive.

10.2 A similarly high percentage also considered that the public can easily access the Code of Conduct, Register of Members Interests and other relevant documents.

11 Relationships

Respondents also gave a very positive image of their relationships with other members and officers with returns of around 90% that confiderees were kept by both other members and officers, that they trusted each other, and that they carried out their roles without fear of being bullied or harassed.

12 Accountability

Once again, respondents were very positive (80%) that member decisions were always or usually transparent and objective, followed agreed procedures and that members were accountable for their decisions and actions. Respondents similarly considered that the public had easy access to information on whom had taken particular decisions.

13 Management of Standards

13.1 Although there was a consistent view from respondents (around 80%) that both members, officers, partners and the public could challenge Council decisions without fear of reprisal, exceptionally, there was a significant minority of members (18% 8 respondents) who tended to disagree with this position when it was applied to themselves.

13.2 Finally, although a high percentage of respondents (80-90%) considered members always or usually took complaints from the public seriously and responded constructively a much smaller percentage 50% considered that referrals to the Standards Board were made appropriately.

14 Team working and co-operation

This elicited another positive response, with 71% of respondents considering that they always or usually worked well together to achieve the Council's common goals, with a further 24% considering that this was sometimes the case. Only 4% or 2 respondents considered this rarely to be the position.

15 Conclusions

15.1 There was a good response from members on their responsibilities under the Code of Conduct, the training that they had received on the Code and their understanding of the distinction between a personal and prejudicial interest and what action they needed to take if it was the latter.

15.2 However, members were much less clear about those interests which they had and which were required to be registered. This may, in part, be due to a greater emphasis being given in member training sessions to other aspects of the Code of Conduct rather than to the Register of Interests. As Monitoring Officer and therefore responsible for these training sessions, I can ensure that greater time is devoted in future sessions to the Register of Interests and those matters which must be recorded.

15.3 There was also clearly an issue for members about their knowledge of policies and information, as referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6.2 which is available, notably on the web site, but which members were unaware of. Clearly, more effort does need to be made to ensure that members are fully aware of these matters. This can be achieved in several ways, notably by

i) references in the members Induction Programme and Induction Pack;

ii) references in ongoing member training sessions;

iii) circular letters to members identifying where they can easily access Council policies or information on key topics such as Freedom of Information and Data Protection; and

iv) ensuring that whenever references are made to Council policies in reports an e-link is always given to the policy.

15.4 In order to achieve this, discussions will need to take place with other corporate managers particularly the Head of Hampshire Learning Centre.

15.5 There was also a positive response from members in terms of their interaction with themselves and officers so far as honesty, integrity and maintaining confidences was concerned, together with the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive being viewed as positive role models for the ethical agenda. However, there was a notable minority of members (8 respondents) who perceived that challenging Council decisions could result in some form of reprisal. This would seem to be a cultural issue which can best be demonstrated by members themselves showing this not to be the case.

15.6 Another issue which can best be resolved by members themselves is a perception that referrals of complaints to the Standards Board are made inappropriately. Although complaints of County Councillor complaints to the Standards Board are very small in number, this perception could be addressed by members making preliminary enquiries to ascertain that a complaint is, on the face of it, justified before lodging it with the Standards Board.

16 Recommendations

That the Governance Committee and the Standards Committee

1. Note the generally positive results of the survey on ethical governance at the County Council.

2. Agree that future training sessions given to members by the Monitoring Officer on conduct should give greater emphasis on member obligations regarding the Register of Interests.

3. That action should be taken as referred to in paragraph 15.3 to ensure that members are fully aware of Council policies and where further information is available.

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