To follow

Councillors A Bridson and D Roberts left the meeting whilst this item of business was considered.  Councillor G Ellis indicated his intention to leave the meeting but before doing so sought further clarification, from the Head of Legal & Member Services, on whether his particular interest was in fact personal and prejudicial.  Following some discussion Councillor G Ellis also left the meeting whilst this item of business was under discussion.

The Committee considered the letters provided by Mr M Morton; one dated 17 July and the other hand delivered to Brian Cummings (Independent Committee Member at the time) on 29 September 2011, relating to complaints made by Mr Morton against particular Council Members, the manner in which his complaints had been dealt with and what further action/steps should be taken by the Council’s Standards Committee.

The Head of Legal & Member Services advised Members that there was a jurisdictional issue that needed to be considered in relation to the matters raised by Mr Morton in his letters.

The Committee was advised that all the complaints lodged by Mr Morton against the Council Members in question were considered by the Committee’s Initial Assessment Panel who had subsequently referred them to Standards for England for consideration. The complaints were considered by Mr Bannister of Standards for England, who determined that no further action be taken in respect of each complaint. The notices confirming Standards for England’s decision was dated 17 July 2011.

Mr Bannister, in the decision notices had commented that “it may be for the Council’s Monitoring Officer and Standards Committee to examine the findings of the investigation into the charging policy when (it) concludes and then consider the role of individual members”.

Mr Morton requested that the Committee resolve at its meeting that the comment made by Mr Bannister (referred to above) be “acted upon” and that “the conduct of Councillors McLaughlin, Roberts, Bridson and Williams is considered following the completion of the Independent Review undertaken by Anna Klonowski”.

The Head of Legal & Member Services advised that all complaints alleging a potential breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct must be dealt with in accordance with the current standards regime/framework. Under this regime/framework, all such complaints must be referred to an Initial Assessment Panel who decided the course of action (which was specifically defined) to be taken. With regards Mr Morton’s complaints, the Initial Assessment Panel referred all his complaints made to Standards for England who, after consideration of all the information provided, determined that no further action be taken in relation to the complaints.

The Head of Legal & Member Services advised that under the current standards regime/framework there was no appeal or other review provision available to a complainant where Standards for England had determined that no further action be taken in relation to a particular complaint following a referral by an Initial Assessment Panel.  Where a complainant was dissatisfied with a decision of Standards for England, the complainant should consider seeking redress through Judicial Review. The Committee was advised that it could not, in view of the determinations made by Standards for England, re-examine or consider again the complaints made by Mr Morton under the current standards regime/framework.

The Committee was further advised that in considering this matter, regard needed to be had to the rights and expectations of those Subject Members against whom the complaints had been made. All Members were entitled to have any complaints made against them dealt with promptly and determined properly and fairly under the Standards regime/framework.

The Committee noted that Mr Morton was not seeking a ‘discretionary review’ into the decisions made by Standards for England. However, he did request that the Committee act upon the comment made by Mr Bannister (referred to above) and also consider the conduct of the Subject Members now that the independent review by Ms Anna Klonowski had been completed.

The Committee was advised that the final report prepared by Ms Klonowski did not recommend any action/steps be taken in relation to the Subject Members or the issues and matters forming the basis of the complaints made by Mr Morton.  The Committee noted that the published final report had been redacted and it could not be certain if the Subject Members had been mentioned; however it was acknowledged that no specific issues or concerns had been raised concerning the conduct/role of Members in relation to the Council’s charging policy.

The Committee further acknowledged that the manner in which Mr Morton had been treated by the Council in relation to his ‘whistleblowing’ concerns had been disgraceful and was regretted by the Council.  It was noted that the Council had apologised to Mr Morton accordingly.

The Committee considered that acceding to the request made by Mr Morton would be tantamount to the re-examination and further consideration of complaints that had already been fully considered and determined by Standards for England under the standards regime/framework.  The Committee did not consider that there was any justification or basis to refer the matter back to Standards for England for further considerations. 

Consequently, in summary the Committee:

• considered the representations made by Mr Morton in his letters of 17 July 2011 and hand delivered letter of 29 September 2011. Particular regard was had to the representations made by Mr Morton in relation to the role and conduct of specific Council Members;

• gave due consideration to the representations made by Mr Bannister of Standards for England in the decision notices dated 12 July 2011 relating to the complaints made by Mr Morton against four Council Members and considered all relevant factors;

• acknowledged that the manner in which Mr Morton had been treated in the past by the Council was not acceptable and noted that the Council had apologised to Mr Morton for both its conduct and failings; and

• did not consider it could now address the matters raised by Mr Morton in his letters particularly given that the complaints made against the four Council Members in question had been properly and fully considered and determined by Standards for England; and a decision made that no further action be taken in relation to these complaints.

Accordingly, after careful consideration of this matter the Committee

RESOLVED (unanimously): That

(1)  it would not act upon the comments of Mr Bannister and would not consider any further the conduct of the four Council Members in question, following the completion of the independent review by Ms Anna Klonowski; and

(2)  the Head of Legal & Member Services be instructed to write to Mr Morton to convey its decision on this matter, as soon as possible.