To receive any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the Constitution, which is available to view at the following link:-
https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeID=151&Info=1&bcr=1
The deadline for the submission of public questions is 3 clear working days before the meeting.
The deadline for the submission of a statement is midday the working day before the meeting.
The deadline for the submission of a petition is 10 working days before the meeting.
Minutes:
It was reported that three public questions had been received.
Public Questions from Mr Alex McKinstry
Question 1.
Complaint 97 was lodged at least 15 months ago - it was listed in the report to this committee of 5 July 2022, and a detailed account of the subject councillor's disengagement was given to this committee on 13 March 2023. Paragraphs 16-18 of tonight's report confirm, moreover, that since this complaint was upheld for a second time on 28 March, the subject councillor has been contacted five times asking if she will comply with the related sanctions (on 3 April; on 6 June, via email, phone and Teams; and again on 10 August). Just for absolute clarity, has the subject councillor replied to or acknowledged any of these recent attempts at contacting her in any way?
Response
To confirm that there has been some further recent communication in relation to this matter and further details will be provided in the event that the Committee tonight agrees a report should be drafted and presented to the next meeting of Full Council.
Question 2.
Can we have the names of the subject councillors in complaints 97, 121, 141, 142 and 146, each of which have been upheld or partially upheld? I ask this partly because I see nothing in the Constitution that disallows this; partly due to the gravity of some of the proven allegations; and partly because members have been named at these meetings before, even where no breach of the code has been established. The naming of errant councillors also corresponds with case law (R v Broadlands District Council, ex parte Lashley, 2001) and with Kemi Badenoch's reply to the Committee on Standards in Public Life, 2022, namely that "be[ing] criticised in public" and "held to account via the ballot box" are among the potential consequences of code of conduct breaches. If the Council is not going to name the subject councillors at this stage, can we have the reasons?
Response
I am not able to give the names of the subject Councillors as these matters were decided at the informal stage of the Code of Conducts complaints process. This stage of the process is dealt with by the Chair of Standards in consultation and it is accepted that at this stage of the process a duty of confidence is owed to the subject councillor. In the event that a complaint is referred for an independent investigation, considered and upheld by the Standards Committee at the formal stage of the process, then the subject Councillor’s details are made known, unless it is considered that an exemption applies. Similarly, in the event that the Committee agrees that there should be a report to Council for non-compliance, then the subject Councillor’s details will also be made known. This position is congruent with the decision referred to in the question, the decision in R v Broadlands District Council, ex parte Lashley.
Question 3.
Paragraph 8, meanwhile, shines some fleeting light on the recent volume and handling of complaints; but is no substitute for the detailed annual report on code of conduct complaints, which for some reason has not been produced this year. Can the Chair confirm whether production of the annual reports has been discontinued - I accept that they're not a statutory requirement - and in the absence of such a report, can we have the number of complaints against BCP councillors determined between 1 April 2022 and 31 March 2023, plus the number of complaints that were upheld or upheld in part?
Response
The production of this report has not been discontinued and its value in providing some more detailed analysis is really appreciated. This year’s report is late however but will be presented to the next meeting of the Standards Committee.