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 midday on Wednesday 11 March [midday 3 clear working days before the meeting].
The deadline for the submission of a statement is midday on Monday 16 March [midday the working day before the meeting].
The deadline for the submission of a petition is Monday 2 March [10 working days before the meeting].
Minutes:
Three public questions were received from Mr McKinstry as follows:
In relation to Agenda Item 8 - Code of Conduct Complaints Update:
Question 1
The report for Item 8 is described in the agenda as "an update on complaints regarding alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct ... received or concluded since the last report to the Committee in October 2025." However, it appears that fifteen complaints have been excluded from tonight's round-up. This is apparent from gaps in the numerical sequence: there is no sign of complaints BCP-230 to 232, or BCP-238 to 249, all inclusive, and none of these were included in October's report (which stopped at BCP-229). Why the apparent omissions?
Response
Thank you for your question and apologies for the confusion with the schedule of complaints. I shall deal with these in numerical order for ease of reference.
Complaints BCP-230, 231, 232 and 238 failed to provide any supporting evidence or insufficient evidence to support their complaint and to link any allegations to an elected councillor. An invitation for additional evidence was requested but this has not been forthcoming. None of these complaints progressed beyond the initial pre-registration stage. The complainants were advised accordingly.
Complaint BCP-239 was registered and assigned a reference number, however, upon initial review it was determined to be out of scope as the issues raised did not relate to potential breaches of the Code of Conduct. The complainant was informed.
Complaint BCP-240 was assigned a reference number following the receipt of email communication, however, the complainant was asked to supply additional details required to commence the complaint. No additional information has been forthcoming.
Complaint references BCP-241 to 249 have not been assigned to any complaints for administrative reasons to avoid the allocation of duplicated numbers.
Question 2
If complaints have been excluded from tonight's report, have any Committee members seen anything of these omitted complaints in any way shape or form; and if so, what precisely will have they seen? Would they have been shown a summary of the allegations in each complaint, along with the reasons for dismissal; or a sample of the excluded complaints; or what, exactly?
Response
As detailed in response to the previous question, none of the omitted referenced complaints were complete and have not therefore progressed beyond the preliminary registration stage. Members of the Standards Committee have not seen any of these complaints.
In relation to Agenda Item 9 - Work Plan and Schedule of Meetings:
Question
This Committee voted for a review of the Code of Conduct complaints procedure on 8 July 2025. On 7 October 2025, the Chair said she had asked for this review to be "expedited ... as we have been promised it for quite some time", and it is indeed listed as a priority item for January 2026 on tonight's workplan. The January 2026 meeting was of course cancelled. Why has the review not been presented to tonight's meeting, therefore; and if the problem is one of resource, how many man hours would it take, roughly, to complete the review, given that the Committee only made two suggestions for this review in the related meetings:
(1) naming errant councillors; and
(2) stopping the closure of complaints by officers where non-compliance arises?
Response
The delay in presenting the review is primarily due to resource and capacity constraints experienced during the Interim Monitoring Officer period, which necessitated the prioritisation of critical activities. Nonetheless, Committee members are scheduled to meet informally to consider the current arrangements, with a view to informing a thorough and comprehensive revision of the procedure. For clarity, this review will not be confined solely to the two issues previously raised but will instead evaluate the complaints procedure in its entirety. Dates are scheduled to commence the review and will be brought back to a future meeting.
[REFERENCES PROVIDED BY MR MCKINSTRY:
Item 9 question
Chair asks for the review to be "expedited ... as we have been promised it" etc: https://www.youtube.com/live/3rM33t_jR_c?si=zGU27L9YGVgI7J6T&t=25m17s
Committee suggests that errant councillors be named: https://www.youtube.com/live/T-5SSqVH8ZU?si=tzFWH8m3ZO_jA5As&t=37m45 , also https://www.youtube.com/live/T-5SSqVH8ZU?si=s9Dr3sOpIXKV-kOI&t=42m30s
Committee suggests that complaints not be closed in instances of non-compliance: https://www.youtube.com/live/3rM33t_jR_c?si=CEa-0nn1gSXEK-A3&t=22m55set. seq. & especially Cllr Armstrong asking "Is there something we can put in the Constitution about this?" - Chair: "Well we are doing a review of the process ..."]