Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page C2
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 2
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,
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 3
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 4
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 5
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 6
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 7
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 8
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 9
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 10
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 11
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 12
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 13
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).
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 14
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 15
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 16
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 17
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 18
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 19
“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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 21
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 22
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).
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 23
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 24
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 25
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 26
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 27
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.
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page 28
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page C3
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
A39315 Standards Board Orig QXD6.qxd 7/7/08 4:39 pm Page C4