Agenda and minutes

To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 25 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded)

(*In accordance with Procedure Rule 25, written notice of an appeal must be received by the Chief Democratic Services Officer at least 24 hours before the meeting)

There were no appeals against refusal of inspection of documents in accordance with Procedure Rule 25 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules.

1. To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.

2. To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.

3.  If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-

RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:-

In relation to agenda item 5 (Minute 5 refers), Appendix 1 (the final report and bundle of evidence of the investigating officer in relation to an investigation into a complaint against a Member), was classified as exempt under Access to Information Procedure Rule 10.4 (7c). Members of the Sub-Committee agreed that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

In relation to agenda item 6, (Minute 6 refers), Appendix 1 (the final report and bundle of evidence of the investigating officer in relation to an investigation into a complaint against a Member), was originally classified as exempt under Access to Information Procedure Rule 10.4 (7c). However, the Committee decided that the public interest in maintaining the exemption was outweighed by the public interest in disclosing the information, as the complaint involves planning matters.

RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:-

·  Appendix 1 of agenda item 5 (Minute 5 refers).

To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.

(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes)

There were no late items submitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.

To declare any personal/prejudicial interests for the purpose of Section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of personal/prejudicial interests for the purpose of section 81(3) of the Local Government Act 2000 and paragraphs 8 to 12 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

To consider the final report of the investigator and in relation to the first allegation, decide whether to accept the investigator’s finding, or whether to refer the matter to a hearing, and in relation to the second allegation, to decide whether the matter should be referred to the Hearings Sub-Committee or the First-Tier Tribunal (Local Government Standards in England) for determination (subject to the agreement of the Principal Judge or his Deputy).

The Assistant Chief Executive (Corporate Governance) submitted a report setting out the findings of the Investigating Officer in a Code of Conduct investigation into a complaint against a Member. The investigation followed the submission of a complaint to the Assessment Sub-Committee, who had resolved to refer the complaint for investigation.

Appendix 1 to the report was designated as exempt under Access to Information Procedure Rule 10.4 (7c).

The Investigating Officer was present at the meeting to present her findings and to respond to any questions from Members.

There were two separate allegations to be considered by the Sub-Committee. In relation to the first allegation, the Sub-Committee accepted the finding of the Investigator that the subject Member had not failed to comply with the Code of Conduct.

In relation to the second allegation, the Investigator had found that the subject Member had failed to:

·  Treat others with respect, contrary to paragraph 3(1) of the Code of Conduct;

·  Bullied others, contrary to paragraph 3(2)(b) of the Code of Conduct;

·  Conducted themselves in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing their office or authority into disrepute, contrary to paragraph 5 of the Code of Conduct; and

·  Used their position improperly to  confer on or secure an advantage or disadvantage for themselves or others, contrary to paragraph 6(a) of the Code of Conduct.

The Sub-Committee resolved to refer the second allegation to the Hearings Sub-Committee for determination.

RESOLVED –

(a)  In relation to the first allegation, Members of the Consideration Sub-Committee resolved to accept the Investigating Officer’s finding of no failure; and

(b)  In relation to the second allegation, Members of the Consideration Sub-Committee resolved to refer the matter to the Hearings Sub-Committee for determination.

To consider the final report of the investigator and decide whether to accept the investigator’s finding, or whether to refer the matter to a hearing.

The Assistant Chief Executive (Corporate Governance) submitted a report setting out the findings of the Investigating Officer in a Code of Conduct investigation into a complaint against a Member. The investigation followed the submission of a complaint to the Assessment Sub-Committee, who had resolved to refer part of the complaint for investigation.

The Investigating Officer was present at the meeting to present his findings and to respond to any questions from Members.

Members agreed that through their actions, the Councillor had not brought their office or authority into disrepute. Members therefore agreed to accept the Investigating Officer’s finding that there had been no failure to comply with the Code of Conduct.

RESOLVED – Members of the Standards Committee resolved to accept the Investigating Officer’s finding of no failure.