To inform the committee of performance in the areas within the remit of the monitoring officer for the municipal year 2014/15.

The Monitoring Officer presented the annual report which was based on the work of the previous post holder. 

A member commented on the reported reduction in the number of standards complaints about members. Discussion took place regarding concerns over the standards process, with the following key points raised:

•           there were more complaints under the previous regime and current figures inferred that standards were improving but the process may not be effective, possibly due to changes in legislation which diluted powers to enforce resolution and so people were less inclined to raise complaints. The process needed to be robust;  

•           The loss of independent persons (IP) had implications for impartiality and decision-making of the one remaining as the subject was entitled to contact an IP for support during the process. Steps were being taken to address the number of IPs with consideration given to sharing this resource with other councils;  

•           the process needed urgent review and agreement by Council so that it was clearer and gave the right message to the public that complaints were followed through and action taken to resolve;

•           there was concern regarding intimidation and bullying within town and parish councils which needed addressing with appropriate support for those affected and with the involvement of Herefordshire Association of Local Councils (HALC);

•           a good councillor will be voted in but if they were disruptive it was not in the interest of the democratic process - councillors who were subjects of complaints needed opportunity to change through advice and training

The whistleblowing policy and procedure was recently agreed by the committee. However, a member raised concern regarding the intimidation of those whose anonymity was not maintained and were referred to the grievance procedure instead of the whistleblowing procedure.  The member was aware of instances of staff who left as a direct result of treatment in relation to their concerns. The member asserted the gravity of this and highlighted that the policy needed to be robust and not be giving lip service to confidentiality.  Concern was that the process was not safe for an individual as they did not get protection under PIDA (Public Interest Disclosure Act) provisions if they were referred to use the grievance procedure rather than the whistleblowing procedure.

In response, the following comments were raised by members:

•           it was the responsibility of officers to implement and use the policy appropriately;

•           since the committee did not have an operational remit, the monitoring officer would be controlling and overseeing whistleblowing activity from this point;

•           in law, an individual would still have protection under PIDA in relation to whistleblowing regardless of the label given to their complaint;

•           the committee could request a review of the new procedure if it were found to be faulty in practice.

A member observed that with regard to corporate governance and decisions made under the scheme of delegation, there was an increase in decisions not going to Cabinet. The same was noted in regard to the General Overview and Scrutiny Committee (GOSC) and there was concern regarding the functioning of the scrutiny process, which although politically balanced there seemed to be little engagement from the administration and lack of understanding of roles which weakened the scrutiny function.   The member cited a recent example at GOSC where opposition members were commented on in relation to the number of questions raised. In the ensuing discussion, it was commented by members that:

•           the level of members’ engagement and depth of questioning needed attention;

•           it was not appropriate for committee members to face ridicule or to inhibit their raising of issues;

•           motions that were put forward by Cabinet were not always adopted so it was not the case that issues were being dismissed.

RESOLVED

That the annual report of the monitoring officer be reviewed and any areas for further work identified for inclusion in the work programme.

In addition, it was resolved that the committee oversees the review of the standards procedure via a working group. Membership of the working group was agreed as: Councillors EPJ Harvey, PD Newman and BA Durkin.