Agenda item

Consultation Paper on new Codes of Conduct for Local Authority Members and Employees

Meeting of Standards Committee (this Committee has now been combined wit the Audit, Standrds and Governance Committee and no longer meets), Thursday 16th October 2008 6.00 p.m. (Item 37.)
View the background to item 37.

[To consider the Department of Communities and Local Government consultation paper entitled "Communities in Control: Real people, real power - Codes of conduct for local authority members and employees" and to make recommendations to Council on the Council's response.]

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report on a Consultation Paper issued by the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) on changes to the Code of Conduct for local authority members and on a proposed new Code of Conduct for local government employees.

At its meeting on 21st October 2008, the Corporate Management Team (CMT) would consider the Consultation Paper insofar as it related to the Employees' Code. The comments and recommendations of the CMT would then be included in a report to full Council on 12th November 2008, with the DCLG's deadline for submission of responses being 24th December 2008.

RECOMMENDED that the Council note the following responses from the Standards Committee on the questions raised in the Department of Communities and Local Government Consultation Paper on changes to the Code of Conduct for local authority members and on a proposed new Code of Conduct for local government employees:

Chapter 2: Code of conduct for local authority members

Question 1

Do you agree that the members’ code should apply to a member’s conduct when acting in their non-official capacity?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Question 2

Do you agree with this definition of ‘criminal offence’ for the purpose of the members’ code? If not, what other definition would you support, for instance should it include police cautions? Please give details.

Standards Committee response:

Yes, however it is felt that police cautions for offences for which there would not be the opportunity of paying a fixed penalty should also be included in the remit of the members' code.

Question 3

Do you agree with this definition of ‘official capacity’ for the purpose of the members’ code? If not, what other definition would you support? Please give details.

Standards Committee response: Yes

Question 4

Do you agree that the members’ code should only apply where a criminal offence and conviction abroad would have been a criminal offence if committed in the UK?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Question 5

Do you agree that an ethical investigation should not proceed until the criminal process has been completed?

Standards Committee response:

Generally yes. However there should be discretion to allow for a member's immediate suspension from office in cases which involve, for example, a serious allegation of sexual/physical abuse involving either a young or vulnerable person or persons, and where the member might in his or her official capacity have contact with such persons.

Such a mechanism for automatic suspension pending the outcome of a criminal investigation is felt necessary in order for the public to have confidence that where a serious allegation has been made young and vulnerable people would not be put at any possible risk.

Question 6

Do you think that the amendments to the members’ code suggested in this chapter are required? Are there any other drafting amendments which would be helpful? If so, please could you provide details of your suggested amendments?

Standards Committee response:

Yes, however whilst agreeing that members who have already registered their interests in line with the 2007 model code should not have to repeat the process following the introduction of any new code, it is felt that members should be required to sign a declaration confirming that their existing register of interests remains up to date and correct.

Question 7

Are there any aspects of conduct currently included in the members’ code that are not required? If so, please could you specify which aspects and the reasons why you hold this view?

Standards Committee response: No

Question 8

Are there any aspects of conduct in a member’s official capacity not specified in the members’ code that should be included? Please give details.

Standards Committee response: No

Question 9

Does the proposed timescale of two months, during which a member must give an undertaking to observe the members’ code, starting from the date the authority adopts the code, provide members with sufficient time to undertake to observe the code?

Standards Committee response:

Yes, this is felt to be more than adequate and that maybe there is no need to extend the existing 28 day period for a member to provide such an undertaking.

Question 10

Do you agree with the addition of this new generalprinciple, applied specifically to conduct in a member’s non-official capacity?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Question 11

Do you agree with this broad definition of ‘criminal offence’ for the purpose of the General Principles Order? Or do you consider that ‘criminal offence’ should be defined differently?

Standards Committee response:

This should also include police cautions for offences where there would not be the opportunity of paying a fixed penalty.

Question 12

Do you agree with this definition of ‘official capacity’ for the purpose of the General Principles Order?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Chapter 3: Model Code of Conduct for local authority employees

Question 13

Do you agree that a mandatory model code of conduct for local government employees, which would be incorporated into employees’ terms and conditions of employment, is needed?

Standards Committee response: Yes, provided that this is not overly bureaucratic or onerous.

Question 14

Should we apply the employees’ code to firefighters, teachers, community support officers, and solicitors?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Question 15

Are there any other categories of employee in respect of whom it is not necessary to apply the code?

Standards Committee response: No

Question 16

Does the employees’ code for all employees correctly reflect the core values that should be enshrined in the code? If not, what has been included that should be omitted, or what has been omitted that should be included?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Question 17

Should the selection of ‘qualifying employees’ be made on the basis of a “political restriction” style model or should qualifying employees be selected using the delegation model?

Standards Committee response: Political restriction.

Question 18

Should the code contain a requirement for qualifying employees to publicly register any interests?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Question 19

Do the criteria of what should be registered contain any categories that should be omitted, or omit any categories that should be included?

Standards Committee response:

The model code of conduct for local authority employees should reflect, as closely as possible, the requirements of the code of conduct for local authority members.

Question 20

Does the section of the employees’ code which will apply to qualifying employees capture all pertinent aspects of the members’ code? Have any been omitted?

Standards Committee response:

The model code of conduct for local authority employees should reflect, as closely as possible, the requirements of the code of conduct for local authority members.

Question 21

Does the section of the employees’ code which will apply to qualifying employees place too many restrictions on qualifying employees? Are there any sections of the code that are not necessary?

Standards Committee response:

The model code of conduct for local authority employees should reflect, as closely as possible, the requirements of the code of conduct for local authority members.

Question 22

Should the employees’ code extend to employees of parish councils?

Standards Committee response: Yes

Supporting documents: