annual review 2007-08democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/documents/s34863... · 20 spreading the...

Local deliv

ery. N

ational s

upport.

Annual Review 2007-08

A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page C1

Helping the locally-based framework to flourish.

Contents

01 A natural progression

02 Foreword from Chair

and Chief Executive

06 Working together,

succeeding together

10 Growing into our new role

16 Clear lines of communication

20 Spreading the word

24 Case summaries

26 The year ahead

28 The Board

We will also devolve most aspects of

the conduct regime to local authorities

with a streamlined Standards Board

refocused as a light touch regulator.

Local Government White Paper 2006.

Only by local ownership and

involvement can issues of ethical

organisational culture be properly

addressed and the overall regulatory

framework for standards in local

government made proportionate

and strategic.

Getting the Balance Right: Implementing

Standards of Conduct in Public Life:

the Tenth Report of the Committee on

Standards in Public Life.


01

A natural progression

Local authorities work for local people. They understand local issues.

They appreciate local concerns. It’s only right, therefore, that they are

responsible for upholding the standards that their local communities demand.

The Standards Board for England

has been working towards a locally-

based standards framework since

15 December 2005, the publication

date of ‘Getting the Balance Right:

Implementing Standards of Conduct

in Public Life: the Tenth Report of the

Committee on Standards in Public

Life’. Local responsibility, local

accountability, high standards is

the promise. The Standards Board

is here to help local authorities fulfil

it – and to provide the independent,

national oversight that is essential

for maintaining public confidence.

Comprehensive consultation, detailed

planning and practical assessments

have allowed us to test, refine and

propose a system that will, by the time

you read this, have been implemented.

This review of 2007-08 outlines the

changing role of the Standards

Board, the new responsibilities of

local authorities, and the considerable

work we have undertaken in the

past year to allow this new system

to be realised.

Key achievements in 2007-08

The publication of key advice on the implications of the revised

Code of Conduct.

Ensuring 99% of monitoring officers and 90% of standards committee

members knew of the changes to the new Code by its adoption date

of 1 October 2007.*

Attracting more than 1,000 members and monitoring officers to

roadshows explaining both the new Code and the new local framework.

Successful Annual Assembly, with positive feedback from delegates.

The completion of local pilots designed to explore and shape the

new local assessment framework.

44% of members think that standards of behaviour have improved

in recent times. This is up from 27% in 2004.*

Two in three stakeholders now consider that our published information

and guidance communicates key messages ‘very or fairly well’.*

90% of allegations acknowledged within two working days.

Average time taken from receipt of allegations to notification was

ten working days.

Completing 96% of cases referred for investigation within six months.

*BMG Research 2007.

A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 1

With the new framework in place, our task now is

to g

uar

ante

e its

success in t

he y

ears

ah

ea

d.

Seven years of progre

ss o

n et

hic

al sta

ndard

s.

02

The local framework is now in place. Local authorities are now responsible for

placing ethical standards at their heart, tasked with both implementing the Code

of Conduct and dealing with local complaints. The Standards Board has played

a significant role in the introduction of this new, more responsive system.


03

Foreword from Chair and Chief Executive

We are in a period of real change – for the Standards Board for England

and for the wider ethical agenda. A period of greater local accountability

and focused national support. On 8 May 2008, local authorities’ standards

committees became responsible for receiving complaints and deciding

what to do with them. It was also the date on which the Standards Board

became a strategic organisation, charged with ensuring the effectiveness

of the local framework and for setting the standards agenda nationally.

But rather than a day of dramatic

change, 8 May 2008 was merely the

date on which roles were formalised.

For a number ofyears, local authorities

have been increasingly taking

responsibility for their own ethical

agenda, culminating in the Local

Government and Public Involvement

in Health Act 2007, which gained

royal assent on 30 October 2007.

And this is surely where responsibility

belongs – at the heart of each

authority’s culture; at the core of

good governance. The Code of

Conduct sets out a whole series

of rules governing ethical behaviour.

But this needs to be balanced by

a sense of trust in elected

representatives: members need

to adhere to the rules but they also

need to take responsibility for the

wider ethical agenda.

This is why standards committees

and monitoring officers have such

a vital role to play in ensuring the

Code of Conduct is lived out locally

and upheld. They not only ensure

allegations are considered, but

become champions for high standards

as well. We believe that this approach

will help to demonstrate accountability

and develop greater local trust.

Promoting the values for the

authority and demonstrating

the values of good governance

through upholding high standards

of conduct and behaviour.

Principle 3, CIPFA/SOLACE

Delivering good governance in local government.

Big pictures and small details

So, we didn’t arrive here suddenly.

Indeed, the Standards Board has

been at the heart of the work to

usher in the new era. Over the past

two years, we have been paving

the way for the new framework,

making people aware of what is

happening when. Offering advice

on the big issues of format and

structure of local investigations,


04

`on the implications of the revised

Code of Conduct and on the

importance of maintaining the highest

ethical standards. We’ve gone into

the minutiae too. The details of

monitoring and reporting. The

thresholds that authorities need

to set when considering case

referral. And even a paragraph-by-

paragraph analysis of the revised

Code of Conduct.

We created a series of local pilots,

held over a period of several months,

that would provide an insight into

how the new framework could work

in practice. We consulted widely,

hosted a conference and travelled

the country making sure that every

authority had a chance to question

us and make their concerns known.

Throughout all of this, it has become

clear that there is a great deal of

consensus: local assessment is

a good thing.

Welcoming new talents

This is a new era, in more ways than

one. This will be the last Annual

Review we will oversee as Chief

Executive and Chair. As we write,

our new Chief Executive is taking

up the post. Glenys Stacey was

previously Chief Executive of Animal

Health, where she led a national

organisation through development

and reform. She is also a former

Chief Executive of the Criminal Cases

Review Commission and the Greater

Manchester Magistrates’ Courts

Committee. As a solicitor with

experience of developing and running

complex services organisations, Glenys

is exactly the person we need to lead

the Standards Board in its new role.

This summer will see the appointment

of a new Chair, Dr Robert Chilton, who

takes on the position for a three-year

term beginning on 1 July 2008.

Dr Chilton, whose association with

local government goes back to 1965,

is a Non-Executive Director of the Waste

and Resources Action programme.

He is also a Board member for the

Office of the Information Commissioner,

Chair of the major London housing

association the East Thames Group,

and Deputy Chair of ICSTIS (the

premium phone rate regulator). His

experience, together with his strategic

vision, means that he is ideally placed

to lead the Standards Board in

promoting the highest standards of

conduct across local government.

Real improvements

It has been an honour to lead this

organisation, particularly during such

an exciting period in the Standards

Board’s short history. We both

passionately believe in the need

for ethical behaviour at all levels of

government and we are pleased


Many respondents feel that the

behaviour of elected members has

improved to some degree since

the Standards Board has been

in existence. Some feel that the

improvement has been dramatic ...

many feel that there has been

a marked reduction in examples

of serious and flagrant misbehaviour

such as misuse of authority

resources for election campaigns

and abuse of expenses. However,

most obvious say respondents,

is a more respectful use of language

during meetings, less bullying

behaviour and prejudicial interests

now being disclosed routinely at

meetings. The reason given by most

for the perceived improvement in

member behaviour is the existence

of the Code of Conduct and high

levels of awareness of the rules

of behaviour.

BMG Research 2007.

05

David Prince – Chief Executive

Sir Anthony Holland – Chair

Key indicators All respondents

Overall satisfaction with the Standards Board

for England

% speak highly of the Standards Board for England

% think the Standards Board for England

successful in defining standards of behaviour

% need support for Code of Conduct

% consider maintaining high standards of behaviour

one of most important local government issues

38%

29%

23%

21%

62%

60%

93%

84%

80%

76%

20072004

BMG Research 2007: Satisfaction with the Standards Board for England – Results.

that standards have improved

demonstrably since the Standards

Board began. The new framework

is now in place and the new

responsibilities for the Standards

Board are clear. There is much hard

work ahead of us. We’d like to wish

Glenys Stacey, Dr Robert Chilton

and all of the team at the Standards

Board for England every success

in the year ahead. We know they’ll

rise to the challenge.


06

Working together, succeeding together

For the new standards system to work, all must buy into it. But buy-in can

only come when everyone understands what is being proposed – and what

those proposals will mean for organisations and, more importantly, individuals.

Making it work

That’s why, over the course of the

year, the Standards Board created

a series of pilots designed to provide

an overview of how the new system

might work in practice. The first of

these, known as the local assessment

of complaints pilot, saw 38 local

authority standards committees

consider 12 real, but anonymised,

complaints, including two appeal

cases. The committees were helped

or observed by officers from the

Standards Board.

We collected a range of data and

feedback from the pilot – which was

then subject to detailed analysis.

Standards committees were asked

to record their decisions on each

case. These decisions could involve

referring allegations to the Standards

Board, referring them to the monitoring

officer for investigation or alternative

action (such as mediation or training)

or not to refer them at all.

Of the ten cases, on average local

standards committees referred six

allegations. This compares to the

Standards Board’s average referral

rate of three out of ten. Part of this

can be explained by the fact that,

in this local pilot, standards

committees had the option of

alternative action – an option not

available to the Standards Board.

76% of decisions taken by

standards committees were reached

by consensus.

In nearly 40% of cases, standards

committees considered that they

were able to reach a quick decision

– and in only 13% of cases did

they find difficulty in reaching

their decisions.

We are greatly encouraged by the

outcome of this vitally important

pilot. It shows that local government

has the capacity, expertise and

confidence to manage the local

assessment of complaints.

Joint arrangements, joint solutions

The second pilot for the local

assessment framework investigated

joint arrangements and whether

standards committees would benefit

from working together. The pilot

offered four different types of joint

working structures.


An online audit pilot

helped to streamline

information returns.

Three pilots

helped us understand

how the new

framework might

work in practice.

38 standards

committees took

part in the first pilot,

considering 12 real,

anonymised

complaints.

A joint

arrangements pilot

looked at the

possibilities of

working together.

Conducting in-d

epth

eva

luat

ions.

Providing com

prehensive guidance.

07

We’ve been working intensively in 2007-08 towards the introduction of

the new framework. We’ve created, run and analysed a series of pilot

studies designed to show us what the new system could be like in

practice. The findings have played a vital role in the final design of

the framework now in place.


08

Key points In the course of all of these pilots

We asked monitoring officers for recommendations for ‘making local

assessment work’ in their authority. The results showed that:

Almost half would increase the frequency of standards

committee meetings.

40% would consider increasing the size of their standards committee.

33% identified a need to have more independent members.

The results of the consultation

largely showed that there are very

mixed preferences in respect of

the operation of joint standards

committees. This re-emphasises

the need for as flexible a legal

framework as possible and the

development of several different

workable structures to suit different

needs in different localities.

Efficient returns

A third pilot looked at the development

of an online audit and information

return system. Testing took place

during November and December

2007 using data from batches of

genuine, anonymised cases. Many

users commented on the care which

had gone into its preparation and

praised how easy the system was

to understand. Concerns were,

however, raised at the delays

suffered when large volumes of data

were added. Refinements to the

information return system were made

and implemented prior to its launch

in May 2008.

Pilot studies such as these are

valuable. But they cannot, of course,

truly replicate the local assessment

system when it comes into

operation. That’s why the Standards

Board took great steps to provide

as much advice and guidance as

possible surrounding the new

system’s operation in May 2008.

With more than six years of

operations behind us, we have the

experience and the expertise to help

local authorities make a successful

transition to local assessment.

With many years’ experience of

allegations and investigations, we

are well placed to support local

authorities. Please see opposite for

detailed information on last year’s

investigations figures. In summary,

in 2007-08 there were:

3,547 allegations received

66% of allegations from members

of the public

14% of allegations referred for

investigation

10 days to decide whether to

refer a complaint for investigation


09

The Standards Board’s ethical

standards officers made 293

final findings in investigations

In some cases, our ethical standards officers have

the option of issuing monitoring officers with

directions to take action to solve local problems –

for example, training for the whole authority or

guidance on proper procedures. The aim is to help

the authority improve its own effectiveness and

conduct, at a far lower cost in time and money

than an investigation. Often we issue directions

in situations where we believe a case has broad

relevance for the overall governance of an authority.

Breakdown of findings

of ‘no further action’

When we complete an investigation, we may

decide to take no action in relation to the subject

of the complaint. This is often because the

appropriate action has already been taken.

For example, apologies may have been made or

a registration of interests completed. Sometimes,

having examined all the evidence, it is insufficient

to decide that there was a breach of the Code of

Conduct. Changes to legislation mean that this is

the last year when ‘no further action’ findings will

cover such a range of different outcomes.

3% 5% 43%

24% 25%

40% 26% 12%

1% 0% 21%

Standards Board investigations 2007-08

From April 2007-March 2008, the Standards Board referred 524 allegations

for investigation. During the same period, 285 allegations that were referred

for investigation were sent to monitoring officers for local investigation.

Adjudication Panel for England

determinations 2007-08

Of the 293 final findings, we sent eight

cases to the Adjudication Panel in

2007-08, one of which is yet to be heard.

The Adjudication Panel made ten

determinations, as three cases were heard

in 2007-08 but referred in 2006-07.

Of the ten determinations made by

the Adjudication Panel in 2007-08:

0 no sanction

1 no breach

4 disqualified for 15 months to five years

2 suspended for up to a year

3 disqualified for up to a year

Standards committee determinations

We sent 15 cases to standards

committees in 2007-08 following

investigations by Standards Board

ethical standards officers.

Of these, three are still to be

heard. Standards committees made

14 determinations, as two cases

were heard in 2007-08 but referred

in 2006-07.

10 suspension

(including training and apology)

1 no breach

1 censure

1 training

0 partial suspension

1 censure and training

0 apology and training

*

No evidence of a breach – 73

No further action

(see below for a breakdown

of this finding) – 126

Referred to a monitoring

officer/local standards

committee – 15

Referred to the Adjudication

Panel for England – 8

Directions* – 71

No longer councillor/

councillor seriously ill – 26

Remedy agreed or in

place – 15

Evidence not decisive – 33

Mitigation or trivial – 51

Whole council problem – 1

Public interest defence – 0


10

Growing into our new role

Local authorities’ standards committees became responsible for receiving

complaints and deciding what to do with them in May 2008. Local members

were already local champions for standards. The new system formalises

and codifies this new responsibility, setting out exactly what is expected

of local authorities – and, of course, the Standards Board.

The Audit Commission, in an analysis

of responses to an ethical standards

self-assessment survey, found

that 70% of members and 48%

of officers thought their standards

committee had made a positive

difference to the ethical environment

in their council.

Self-assessment survey by the Audit Commission

in conjunction with the Standards Board and the IDeA.

80% of respondents felt that

maintaining high standards

of behaviour for members is one

of the most important issues

facing local government.

BMG Research 2007.

The move to the local assessment

of complaints delivers two crucial

benefits. Firstly, it gives greater power

to local authorities to uphold and

promote ethical standards among their

own members. Secondly, it allows

the Standards Board to concentrate

on ensuring the local framework is

a success, by helping and supporting

local authorities and by taking the

independent, national overview so

important for maintaining public

confidence.

We will continue to investigate the

minority of cases which cannot be

taken on locally. This may be due to

their seriousness, complexity, potential

for precedent setting, conflicts of

interest, impact on the public interest

or some other reason. We shall also

continue to give general advice and

support by telephone, email and

letter on case handling and broader

governance issues.


Help

ing local auth

ori

ties

gro

w in

con

fide

nce.

11

Local assessment brings two key benefits. Firstly, it places responsibility

for upholding standards locally, where it belongs. Secondly, it allows the

Standards Board to ensure the local framework’s success. We also have

a key role in defining the framework at a national level.

A light-touch regulator.

Guidance and support

for local authorities.

Setting the framework nationally.


12

Local filter pilot complaint handling

The following flowchart shows a breakdown of the main stages of the local

assessment process. More details are available in the local assessment

guidance, available from our website.

Set upassessmentsub-committee

Notify the parties of the decision

Pre-assessmentreports and enquiries

Assessmentsub-committeemeets

Assessmentof complaintagainst agreed criteria

Decision oncomplaint

Refer forinvestigation bymonitoring officer

Refer forinvestigation bythe Standards Board for England

Refer forfurther action

No further action

Notify the parties of the decisionand the rightsof appeal

Note:

If at any stage (up until decision) the complainant asks

to withdraw their complaint, refer to the guidance.

If confidentiality is requested by the complainant you

may need to amend the notification stages of this process.

Please refer to the guidance.


13

Key features Of the new system

Standards committees will be responsible for receiving complaints

in relation to the Code of Conduct and deciding what to do with them.

Standards committees must be chaired by an independent member

who is not a councillor.

Standards committees will be able to work with other standards

committees.

We will be responsible for monitoring and ensuring the effectiveness

of local arrangements, including supporting authorities which are

experiencing difficulties.

We will continue to be responsible for carrying out those investigations

which cannot be carried out locally.

included information on: the optimum

size and structure of standards

committees; effective practice;

training requirements; the role of the

monitoring officer; and information

on the monitoring process.

In February 2008, we published

a training exercise for standards

committees, designed to help them

prepare for local assessment. The

exercise was developed following

the findings of the local assessment

pilot conducted over the summer

of 2007 and consists of a range of

real, anonymised complaints that

the Standards Board has dealt with.

Support on the ground

Local pilots, conducted with

close consultation between local

authorities and the Standards Board,

were a successful exercise. They

allowed us to see how the local

assessment of complaints would

work in operation and enabled

local authorities to gauge the

resources – both in terms of people

and time – necessary for successful

investigations. For more information

about our pilot studies, please see

page 6.

In December 2007, we published

a checklist for local authorities. This

was a list of considerations which


14

Each case includes a set of papers

submitted by a complainant and

a summary of each complaint

to help the standards committee

in its decisions. Two appeal cases

give the standards committee

practice at operating the appeal

mechanism. The aim is for standards

committees to decide what action,

if any, they would take in relation

to the complaint.

The Standards Board has produced

a comprehensive range of guidance

materials around the launch of the

new local framework that build on

our own experience and that of local

authorities.

The guidance focuses on four

key areas:

Local assessment and how

it will operate

The role and make-up

of standards committees

Local investigations

Local determinations

These include both the actual

guidance, which sets out the

responsibilities of relevant authorities

and what they need to do to meet

them, and a set of tools that will

enable authorities to meet these

responsibilities, such as templates

for decision notices, letters and forms.

This vital support continues now

the framework has been introduced.

Ongoing advice and guidance will

ensure that local authorities have

an invaluable source of practical

experience and knowledge to turn

to whenever issues arise.

At the Standards Board in 2007-08:

100% of telephone enquiries

received a substantive response

within two working days

(excluding case-related issues).

85% of correspondence received

a substantive response within five

working days of receipt

(excluding case-related issues).


15

Fair for all

Effective monitoring is essential for

a successful local framework.

The Standards Board for England

provides the independent national

oversight essential for maintaining

public confidence.

Monitoring:

Ensures the system as a whole

is fair – fair to those who are

complained about and to the

complainants.

Identifies those standards

committees, monitoring officers

and authorities which are

experiencing problems.

Identifies areas where either

individual support or more

general guidance is needed.

Ensuring the system is fair will be

a particular challenge. This is vital

if the public are to have confidence

in their local representatives; they

need to know members will be

held to account if they fall below

the standards expected of them.

Defining and monitoring

At a national level, the Standards

Board was set a specific task:

helping government define the

framework. We already have a role

as champion of high standards at

a national level. We will now define

what it is that people can expect

the standards framework to deliver.

This will include what is expected

of monitoring officers and standards

committees – and tie-in with our local

monitoring role.

Monitoring will also help us as

champions of high standards nationally.

As we work with individual local

authorities, we will discover examples

of good practice, which we can

then share with all local authorities,

providing them with a benchmark

for their own performances.

Making savings in our new role

The grant to the Standards Board for

2007-08 for continuing operating

costs was £9,461,000. We are planning

to achieve savings in operating costs

over the next three years. Our relocation

to Manchester has meant that we

will be able to generate significant

savings, particularly in the occupancy

costs of premises and on payroll and

professional fees.

The year-on-year corporate services

savings are estimated at £847,000

in 2008-09, a further £420,000

in 2009-10 and a further £86,000

in 2010-11. By 2010-11, our London

corporate services operating costs will

have reduced by £1,353,000, and the

Standards Board will have generated

a combined three years’ savings of

£3,467,000 when compared to the

2007-08 cost. For a breakdown of our

expenditure in 2007-08, please see

our Annual Report and Accounts.


16

Following the introduction of the revised Code of Conduct, the Standards

Board ensured that all members were aware of the changes – and what they

would mean in practice. We created a series of publications, held a programme

of roadshows across the country and talked at a number of key events.

A range of publications created

to promote and explain the Code.

An innovative DVD produced

to explore its different aspects.

A comprehensive, updated

website resource for authorities.


Providing guidance on the new Code of Conduct.

17

Clear lines of communication

A series of workshops held

across the country to inform

and to debate its impact.

The revised Code of Conduct was implemented on 3 May 2007 and had

to be adopted by every local authority by 1 October 2007. The Standards

Board for England was the principal driver behind its development and

implementation; we consulted widely and put our proposals to government,

which were largely accepted. We believe the Code is now better suited to

the needs of local government. Clearer and simpler to understand, it gives

greater scope for members to speak as community advocates and act on

behalf of the people who elected them.

The Code of Conduct sets out the

rules which govern the behaviour

of members. All elected, co-opted

and independent members of

local authorities, including parish

councils, fire, police and national

park authorities, are covered by the

Code. It governs areas of individual

behaviour such as members not

abusing their position or not misusing

their authority’s resources. In addition,

it covers the disclosure of interests

and withdrawal from meetings where

members have relevant interests.

Members are also required to record

their financial and other interests.


18

93% of members support

the need for a Code of Conduct.

Up from 84% in 2004.

BMG Research 2007.

99% of monitoring officers and

91% of standards committee

members were aware of the changes

to the framework structure.

BMG Research 2007.

44% of members think that standards

of behaviour have improved in

recent times. Up from 27% in 2004.

BMG Research 2007.

and developing understanding of

the Code. The Case Review 2007

was distributed to delegates at the

Annual Assembly and is available

from our website along with all of our

other publications.

Monitoring officers are very satisfied

with communications with the

Standards Board. Some commented

that the standard and clarity of

Standards Board publications has

improved in recent years.

BMG Research 2007.

The Code governs a broad range

of ethical matters and, as such, goes

into some detail about issues such

as impartiality, equality and bullying,

and intimidation. However, there are

some issues not covered by the Code

Promoting the Code

The Code of Conduct is the single

most important document relating

to ethical conduct for members.

To coincide with the implementation

of the revised Code, the Standards

Board printed and distributed

more than 100,000 copies of our

publication The Code of Conduct:

Guide for members. This provides

an overview of the Code and gives

members a general understanding

of their obligations under it. The

Standards Board also published

a smaller, pocket-sized version of

this guide containing the key points

of the Code.

A further printed publication, The

Case Review 2007, was a detailed,

paragraph-by-paragraph analysis of

the Code. Produced in a new format,

it reflects the evolving interpretation


19

– which therefore do not fall within our

remit – but which do, nevertheless,

affect the behaviour of elected

representatives. One of these

areas is predetermination and bias

and, last year, the Standards Board

published an occasional paper

to provide some much needed

clarity on the topic. This can be

found in the Publications section

of our website.

In September 2007, this printed

support material was complemented

by the production of a DVD entitled

The Code Uncovered. Designed to

help monitoring officers, councillors

and standards committees

understand their obligations, the

DVD uses a fictional scenario to

explore a number of aspects of the

Code. It follows the story of a group

of councillors and local authority

officers as they prepare to discuss

a highly controversial planning

application. As the story unfolds,

areas of potential confusion are

explored and solutions presented.

Training sections and commentary,

interspersed with the drama, explore

issues in more detail.

The Code Uncovered was distributed

free to all monitoring officers and

County Association secretaries.

Total net satisfaction with published

information and guidance provided

by the Standards Board has

increased. The proportion satisfied

minus the proportion dissatisfied

is +43% in 2007 (+36% in 2004).

BMG Research 2007.

Highlight On the road

In June 2007, the Standards Board took to the road for a series of

workshops designed to inform members about the forthcoming

changes and how they would be affected by them. From Newcastle

to Cornwall, the roadshows also gave us a real insight into members’

thoughts, concerns and queries with regard to the new Code. In all,

more than a thousand members and monitoring officers attended

the roadshows.

A month later, the National Association of Local Councils hosted an

event called ‘Cracking the Code’. David Prince, our Chief Executive,

delivered the event’s keynote speech during which he discussed the

changes to the Code and the implications they have for members of

parish and town councils. Other speakers looked in depth at some of

the most important changes, including new rules about personal and

prejudicial interests and a paragraph which deals with bullying.


“All speakers were very k

now

ledgeable

.”

“Most useful event I’ve b

een to

for y

ears

.”

“It has spurred me on to go back and get the standard

s com

mitte

e to

‘up its

ga

me

’.”

Over the year we worked with a large number of organisations and individuals

in a number of ways. This included our Annual Assembly, party political

conferences and the Local Government Association Annual Conference and

Exhibition 2007. We also engaged in a number of partnerships, designed

to develop a greater understanding of the ethical agenda.

20


“An e

xcelle

nt, v

ery

usefu

l con

fere

nc

e.”

21

Spreading the word

The Standards Board for England works with a wide variety of organisations

and individuals. We have a duty to communicate our messages with clarity

and consistency to whoever needs to hear them.

We engage with our audiences in a number of ways. These include the many

events and conferences we either organise or attend, the publications we

produce and our partnerships with those organisations that share our overall

objective of promoting high ethical standards.

Conferences

The Annual Assembly of Standards

Committees is the largest event

organised by the Standards Board.

Down to Detail: Making local

regulation work, was the sixth such

event and was held in October 2007

at the International Convention

Centre in Birmingham.

The conference remains very popular

– all 750 places for the Assembly

were sold well in advance. Delegates

attended a broad range of sessions,

ranging from debates to workshops

to Q&As and fringe events.

The Assembly gave delegates the

first chance to hear the findings of

the local assessment pilot. With eight

sessions in all, delegates were able

to go into some detail on the findings

and make their concerns known.

A number of breakout sessions

over the two days looked at issues

ranging from a session on Cracking

the revised Code, to practical

mediation skills as an alternative

for referring cases.

The main session on day two of the

Assembly – entitled What’s the

Score? – was an open discussion

on the current ethical framework

chaired by our Chief Executive

David Prince. One of the guest

speakers, Dawn Hands, Research

Director and Board Director at BMG

Research, revealed that almost

every monitoring officer and

standards committee member

questioned was aware of the new

Code. Fringe sessions during

the two days included: Parish

Councillors: Community Champions;

Guardians of Good Governance,

the Code and the Law – Mission

Possible?; and Partnership, Ethics,

Governance and Citizen Redress.

The level of debate during the two

days, the sheer number of people

making contributions through

interactive forums, and the feedback

received showed the Sixth Annual

Assembly to be a great success.

Indeed, 97% of delegates said they

were satisfied with the event.


22

Here are just some of the comments

we received:

“All speakers were very

knowledgeable. An excellent,

very useful conference.”

“Most useful event I have been

to for years.”

“It has spurred me on to go back

and get the standards committee

to ‘up its game’.”

“Excellent at imparting understanding

of the issues standards committees

face when local filtering is introduced.”

In July 2007, we had a presence

at the Local Government Association

Annual Conference and Exhibition.

Board members, our Chief Executive

and staff were on hand to:

Share advice and experience

on implementing the changes

to the Code of Conduct, and

how they affect authorities.

Listen first-hand to feedback,

concerns and queries.

Keep delegates informed

of our latest news.

Offer support from our policy teams.

The Standards Board also took

exhibition space at the three major

political party conferences in 2007:

the Liberal Democrats in Brighton;

Labour in Bournemouth and the

Conservatives in Blackpool. This

gave us an opportunity to take

our messages directly to those in

government and local authority

members. We also ran a workshop

at the Labour local government

conference and addressed the

full conference at the Conservative

equivalent.

Working in partnership

The Standards Board has engaged

in a number of partnerships over the

past 12 months. Here is a selection:

Working with the Audit Commission

to ensure standards issues are

incorporated into comprehensive

area assessments and to look at

issues such as proportionate

regulation and information sharing.

Working with the Planning

Advisory Service (PAS) to ensure

its guidance is consistent with

the Code.

Chairing the Joint Working Steering

Committee which meets twice

a year. The committee brings


23

together senior officers from those

organisations with an interest in

the development of good ethical

environments and improved public

confidence in local democracy.

As well as joint projects, the group

provides an opportunity to share

information and avoid duplication.

It oversees the development

and implementation of projects

designed to improve local

ethical frameworks, projects that

underpin: transparent decision-

making; better public services;

and greater public confidence

in local democracy.

We have been working with some

of our partners in planning for

the implementation of a parish

council capacity building bid.

The bid has two strands. The first

is a compact, which will see

Highlight Partnerships

One of our most interesting partnerships has been on the subject

of partnerships themselves. Working with the Improvement and

Development Agency for local government (IDeA), we looked at the

extent to which partnerships work along ethical lines. Partnerships

are an invaluable way of working, bringing together people and

skills that often create new ways of working – and solutions that might

not have been previously been thought of. They do, of course, need

to be implemented and managed ethically and the Standards Board

is keen to promote appropriate behaviours and real accountability

in all partnerships entered into by local authorities.

county associations working

with standards committees and

monitoring officers. The National

Association of Local Councils

(NALC) will lead this programme,

which is expected to run from June

to December 2008. The Improvement

and Development Agency (IDeA)

will lead the second strand – a peer

mentoring programme. Here,

mentors in principal authorities,

and towns and parishes will work

with parish and town councillors

in supporting and strengthening

leadership. This will run from

September to November 2008.

Partnerships need to agree high

standards of conduct that govern

the way in which they work.

Audit Commission, Governing Partnerships:

Bridging the accountability gap (2005).


24

Case summaries

Case 1 Three-month ban for Portsmouth councillor

A city council member was disqualified from being or becoming a councillor

for three months at a hearing of the Adjudication Panel for England. The ban

follows an investigation by the Standards Board into allegations that the

councillor had failed to treat others with respect by being aggressive and

threatening during a meeting. He also used threatening language in an email

before the meeting that undermined the professionalism of council officers.

When the councillor became aware that he was the subject of a Standards

Board investigation, he wrote to the council’s monitoring officer threatening

to email every member of the staff on the council warning them to ‘have

no faith’ in the complainant and her department and demanding to know

why the council still employed her.

The independent Adjudication Panel for England concluded, among

other matters, that the councillor had breached the Code of Conduct

by failing to treat others with respect and bringing his office and authority

into disrepute. The councillor told the Adjudication Panel that he is now

attending anger management classes.

Case 2 Eighteen-month disqualification for Great Yarmouth councillor

A former borough council member has been disqualified for 18 months

after a case tribunal found that he had failed to treat others with respect

and brought the council and the office of councillor into disrepute.

The councillor submitted a council officer to accusations of professional

misconduct and incompetence, and also complained to the Local

Government Ombudsman, misusing this legitimate route to continue to

make an accusation that had been demonstrated to have no substance.

On another occasion the councillor made a serious accusation of criminal

behaviour, but stopped short of reporting his allegation to the police.

After the investigation, the Standards Board’s ethical standards officer

referred the case to the Adjudication Panel for England for determination.

The case tribunal agreed that the councillor’s actions were in breach of the

Code of Conduct and disqualified him for 18 months with immediate effect.


25

Case 3 Five-year ban for former council leader

A former council leader who accessed child pornography on a

computer owned by a borough council has been banned from office

for five years following a Standards Board for England investigation.

The Standards Board’s ethical standards officer considered that

although the offences were committed in the councillor’s own home,

in his own time and using his own internet connection, the fact

that the computer belonged to the council brought his conduct out

of his private capacity.

The ethical standards officer also noted that the councillor was the leader

of the council when he committed the offences and, more than any other

member, could be considered by the public to represent the authority.

The councillor resigned from his position as leader in February 2006

after he was interviewed by police and resigned fully as a councillor

upon being convicted. He will now be unable to stand for re-election

for five years from 6 November 2007.

Case 4 Councillor disqualified after fraudulently claiming benefits

A former council member was banned from being or standing for election

as a councillor for four years by the Adjudication Panel for England.

The Standards Board investigated allegations that the councillor had

brought his office or authority into disrepute after he pleaded guilty

to charges of fraudulently claiming payments over a number of years.

After his conviction the councillor was eventually ordered to pay back

the £1,100 he had claimed and given a 200-hour community punishment

order. The Adjudication Panel for England agreed that the councillor

had brought his office and authority into disrepute by making a number

of false claims over a prolonged period in his official capacity as

a councillor, at the expense of the taxpayer and for his own benefit.


The f

ram

ew

ork

is

firm

ly e

mbedded.

It’s already having a positive impact. N

ow w

e ne

ed to

nurt

ure

its

succ

ess.

26

“We are committed to devolving decision-making as much as possible to the local

level, and local councils are best placed to deal with all but the most serious

conduct issues. This new tough but proportionate regime means the public

will be able to have full confidence in their local representatives.” John Healey,

Minister for Local Government, 2008.


27

The year ahead

In a year of fundamental change, we have never lost sight of our overall

goal. If the public are to have true confidence in their elected representatives

we need to do all we can to uphold the highest standards of ethical

behaviour. We are convinced that the greater responsibilities placed on

local authorities will make this task easier. We are also convinced that the

more strategic role of the Standards Board for England will enable us to

offer greater support and advice on the ground.

The new framework is now firmly

embedded in the culture of local

authorities. The task now for the next

12 months is to ensure that standards

committees and monitoring officers

are confident in their roles and that

the system is operated efficiently

at the local level. We will provide

guidance and information on the

management of cases locally. We will

offer a light touch when it comes to

monitoring. And we will look to highlight

good practice wherever we see it.

We believe the changes are right –

and they are already making

a positive impact. Our work now is

to ensure their continued success.


28

The Board

Sir Anthony Holland – Chair

Sir Anthony is the Independent Complaints Commissioner for the

Financial Services Authority and was Chair of the Northern Ireland

Legal Services Commission and of the Access Dispute Committee

until July 2007. During his career, Sir Anthony has held several

positions, including being Principal Ombudsman to the Personal

Investment Authority Ombudsman Bureau (1997-2000). He is

additionally currently a Lay Member of the council of the Royal

Institution of Chartered Surveyors. Sir Anthony Holland will be

retiring from the Standards Board on 30 June 2008.

Patricia Hughes CBE – Deputy Chair

Patricia Hughes CBE was the Chief Executive of the London Borough

of Sutton from 1990 until February 2001. Between 1987 and 1990,

Patricia was the Deputy Chief Executive and Borough Solicitor to

the London Borough of Islington. Patricia was a Board Member at

the National Disability Council from 1998 to 2000, and was awarded

the CBE in 2001. Patricia Hughes will be retiring from the Standards

Board on 30 June 2008.

Councillor Shirley Flint

Shirley Flint is an Independent Councillor at North Kesteven District

Council, elected in 1995. She is a member of the standards

committee, having previously been Chairman for four years.

Prior to that she was Chairman of the Tenant Liaison Panel and

the Housing and Environmental Health Committee. She is also

a Parish Councillor on Skellingthorpe Parish Council.

Councillor Beatrice Fraenkel – 23/10/06 to 07/03/08

During her time as a Board member, Beatrice Fraenkel was a Liberal

Democrat Liverpool city councillor. She chaired the council’s standards

committee and was Liverpool City Council Urban Design Champion.

She was the independent chair of RENEW Northwest (the Regeneration

Centre of Excellence for the North West, one of eight across the English

regions), and chaired an NHS primary care trust and a housing association.

Paul Gott

Paul Gott is a Barrister and a member of Fountain Court Chambers. He

was appointed as Junior Counsel to the Crown in 1999 and appointed

to the Treasury Counsel “A” Panel in 2005. He practises in commercial

and employment law, with employment law specialisations in the areas

of strike action, discrimination and equal pay. Commercial law

specialisations include civil fraud, banking and accountants’ negligence.


Elizabeth Hall

Elizabeth Hall was with the Financial Services Authority for ten

years and continues to work there as a Consultant. She is a Lay

Member of the Council of Queen Mary University of London, and

Chair of its Research Ethics Committee. Elizabeth is also a Member

of committees of the Bar Standards Board, and is a Director of

several small charitable trusts in east London. In addition, Elizabeth

is active on committees in the Church of England, including

regeneration work linked to the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Councillor Mehboob Khan

Mehboob Khan is Leader of Kirklees Labour Group and Deputy Chief

Whip at the Local Government Association. He is also a Member

of West Yorkshire Fire Authority, a Non-Executive Director of Kirklees

NHS Primary Care Trust and a Board Member of the West Yorkshire

Probation Service. He is a Member of the UK delegation to the EU

Committee of the Regions.

Professor Judy Simons

Judy Simons is Professor of English and pro Vice-Chancellor at

De Montfort University, where she was responsible for re-drafting

the University’s code of human research ethics. She is on the

strategic committee for leadership, governance and management

at the Higher Education Funding Council for England and was a

Board Member of the Higher Education Academy and its first chair

of Council. She is a governor of Lady Manners School in Bakewell.

Roger Taylor – 22/03/01 to 30/10/07

Roger Taylor is a Solicitor and is currently an Executive Director

of Pinnacle-psg (Consulting), a government research, PFI/PPP

and non-health consultancy. He was Chief Executive of Manchester

City Council between 1984 and 1988, and Chief Executive of

Birmingham City Council between 1988 and 1994. Roger is an

honorary fellow of the Institute of Local Government Studies

and became interim Chief Executive at the London Borough of

Waltham Forest in February 2007.

Councillor Sir Ron Watson CBE

Sir Ron Watson CBE has been a Conservative councillor since 1969

and has held many leadership positions, including Leader of the

council on Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council. He is currently

Vice Chair of the Urban Commission. He is Regional Lead Peer for

the Improvement and Development Agency (IDEA), a Lay Member

of the Mental Health Review Tribunal, Chair of the Southport and

Ormskirk NHS Hospital Trust and a Member of the UK Delegation

to the EU Committee of the Regions.

29


The Standards Board for England, Fourth Floor, Griffin House, 40 Lever Street, Manchester. M11BB

Enquiries line: 0845 078 8181 [email protected] www.standardsboard.gov.uk


annual review 2007-08democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/documents/s34863... · 20 spreading the...

Documents