election of chairman

election of vice-chairman

minutes

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 17th November 2009 (Minute Nos. 479 - 484) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Standards Appeal Sub-Committee held on 17th February 2010 (Minute Nos. 727 - 729), the Standards Consideration Sub-Committee held on 21st April 2010 (Minute Nos. 904 - 907) and the Standards Referral Sub-Committees held on 14th January 2010 (Minute Nos. 641 - 643), 16th March 2010 (Minute Nos. 827 - 829) and 3rd June 2010 (Minute Nos. 68 - 75) were accepted by the Committee and signed by the Chairman.

With reference to Minute No. 483/11/09 (Monitoring Officer's Report), the Chairman advised that he had met with the Leader with regard to the financial implications of the investigations carried out by the Standards Sub-Committees and whether these could be considered as part of the budget-setting process. At the time of the meeting, no response had been received and the Monitoring Officer confirmed that he would provide a written response to the Standards Committee on this matter.

Monitoring Officer

declarations of interest

No interests were declared.

part a minutes for confirmation by council

update on the local referral system

The Monitoring Officer introduced this item and Members were asked to consider any lessons learnt over the last year with regard to the implementation of the local referral system. The Monitoring Officer reminded Members that the Coalition Government had announced that it intended to abolish Standards for England. He explained that it was unclear at the moment whether this meant that the entire Standards regime would also be abolished. The Monitoring Officer considered that it was important to note that any changes made now may need to be re-visited when the future of Standards became clearer in the next few months.

Members raised the following points:

Should Kent County Council take on the role of the Standards Committee, rather than Swale Borough Council?

Comments: the process would take longer; would be less localised, the area was too large; staff concentrating on Standards matters could be reduced and costs could be reduced.

How bureaucratic was the present system?

Comments: the present format needed to change; the Monitoring Officer should get more involved at the initial stage of the complaint and filter out, as necessary and the system needed to be less bureaucratic.

The Monitoring Officer advised that at the moment his role did not offer the flexibility to become involved as a mediator at the initial stage of the potential complaint.

The Interim Head of Legal reported that the Standards for England and the Association of County Secretaries and Solicitors had consulted on the local arrangements and queried whether the action taken was proportionate to the complaint made.

In response to a question, the Monitoring Officer explained that most of the legislation involved in the Standards process was included in other matters as well and that it could be possible to remove some of the current provisions. He advised that there needed to be some degree of formality as some incidents warranted a sanction of some sort. He explained that there was an opportunity to simplify the earlier parts of the process.

An Independent Member agreed that there was a lack of flexibility locally, and that the Monitoring Officer should have the opportunity to filter out some complaints.

A Member suggested that the subject matter be informed of the complaint and given the right to reply and considered that mediation could reduce the time and cost involved in a complaint.

Could Local Authorities amalgamate the Standards referral system?

The Monitoring Officer explained that loss of the local aspect could lose local accountability, and defeat the object of having a local filter. He considered that a logical partnership would be through Mid Kent Improvement Partnership, but questioned whether it was appropriate to have other Local Authorities involved and whether they would understand local issues.

The Chairman suggested that the Standards Committee at Swale should keep the structure brief to reduce resources and costs. The Monitoring Officer explained that the process could be re-designed to be more smoothly operated, still meeting the key elements and being aware that sanctions may have to be made in some cases. He acknowledged that there was a lot of paperwork for the cases being considered at the Sub-Committees, but explained that this was a necessary part of the process. A Member stated that the Code of Conduct was a useful tool to have and should not be abolished.

The Monitoring Officer explained that Members' views on the way forward would be collated with other Local Authority's views when options for dealing with standards issue in future were developed. There was currently no indication of when this would happen.

appointment of independent members and matters arising from the coalition government

The Monitoring Officer introduced this item and explained that the two current Independent Members would continue in their role.

terms of reference for the local filter and determination

The Monitoring Officer introduced the tabled report, which set out the proposed changes to the Standards Committee and its Sub-Committees to ensure that local assessments were carried out in accordance with best practice. He explained that this was a 'tidying up' exercise in the interim, before the position of the Standards regime was made clear.

The Interim Head of Legal suggested that with regard to recommendation (7), the timescale was too short and an Independent Member suggested that the recommendation be changed to reflect this.

In response to a question, the Monitoring Officer explained that any changes to the Standards Committee Articles and the terms of reference would be made now but any other changes to the standards regime then form part of the Constitution Review.

parish council representation

The Monitoring Officer introduced this item which reported on a request from the KALC to increase Parish Council representation on the Standards Committee from two Parish Councillors to three. He considered that it was not the right time to make these changes until the future of the standards framework became clear. The Monitoring Officer suggested that a third representative from the KALC could attend the Standards Committee as an observer which would give flexibility and allow a third representative to become more knowledgeable about the standards process.

work programme

The Monitoring Officer introduced the tabled Work Programme which set out the programme of suggested themes for the Standards Committee to consider. He advised that there was a need to be selective on the work carried forward because of limited resources and suggested a core area of essential work, plus additional pieces as appropriate be adopted.

An Independent Member suggested that at the present time of uncertainty, it would be best to concentrate on those areas that were essential.

Members looked at the programme and made comments on the proposals.

The Monitoring Officer suggested that the document be used as a framework, to be added to each agenda and updated at each meeting.