Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that Councillor Randall Johnson be elected Chair for the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION that in accordance with that, in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the following Paragraph(s) of  Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act:

·         Paragraph 1 (information relating to an individual);

·         Paragraph 2 (information likely to reveal the identity of an individual); and

·         Paragraph 3 (information relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person [including the authority holding that information]).

RESOLVED that, in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the following Paragraph(s) of  Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act:

·         Paragraph 1 (information relating to an individual);

·         Paragraph 2 (information likely to reveal the identity of an individual); and

·         Paragraph 3 (information relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person [including the authority holding that information]).

Report of the Director of Corporate Services (Monitoring Officer) (DDC/16/1) attached.

(An item taken in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 during which the press and public were excluded from the meeting).

The Committee conducted a hearing into allegations that Councillor Mark Healey had failed to comply with the Authority’s approved Members’ Code of Conduct (“the Code”).  The Committee conducted the hearing in two stages, the first to determine “findings of fact” as to whether or not, on the balance of probabilities, the alleged breaches of the Code had been established.  The second stage dealt with the imposition of sanctions – including hearing submissions in mitigation - in the event that breaches of the Code were found to have been established.

STAGE 1 – FINDINGS AS TO FACT

During this stage the Committee:

·         considered a report of the Director of Corporate Services (Monitoring Officer) DDC/16/1) to which was appended:

o      a report of the external Investigating Officer summarising the investigation findings into the alleged breaches of the Code;

o      a copy of the Committee’s Terms of Reference (which featured, amongst other things, sanctions available to the Committee in the event of a breach of the Code being established);

o      the Authority’s approved Members’ Code of Conduct; and

o      Guidance on Making a Complaint

·         considered a written submission of Councillor Healey circulated with the agenda for the meeting together with a supplementary submission circulated subsequently;

·         received presentations from both the Investigating Officer and Councillor Healey; and

·         received evidence from two witnesses  - Witness A and Witness B - as to fact.

The Investigating Officer, Councillor Healey and Witnesses A and B were also questioned in some depth on their submissions by each of the Committee Members and the Independent Person.

The report of the Investigating Officer detailed that relevant legislation to the investigation included Chapter 7 of Part 1 of the Localism Act and the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012.  The investigation itself had been conducted in accordance with guidance previously prepared by Standards for England and which had been judicially tested.  The Investigating Officer had concluded at the outset of the investigation that, at all relevant times outlined in the complaint, Councillor Healey was acting in his official capacity as a Member of the Authority and as such was bound by the Code.

The alleged breaches of the Code focussed on the following specific aspects:

Point 1(a) - has there been a failure on behalf of Councillor Healey to register and declare a disclosable pencuniary interest in Firemark Education Community Interest Company (CIC)?

The Investigating Officer’s report on this aspect detailed that Councillor Healey took no remuneration for his work with Firemark Education CIC and received nothing other than actual expenses.  On this basis, the Investigating Officer did not consider that a disclosable pecuniary interest existed and flowing from this there could be no breach of the Code in terms of failure to register or declare any such disclosable pecuniary interest.  This was accepted by the Committee.

Point 1(b) – has there been a  ...  view the full minutes text for item DDC/3

(An item taken in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 during which the press and public were excluded from the meeting).

Having dealt specifically with the allegations into breaches of the Code of Conduct by Councillor Healey, the Committee then went on to consider whether – arising from the investigation and hearing – any general recommendations should be made to the Authority.  The Committee

RESOLVED that the Authority be recommended to approve:

(a).      the undertaking of a review of the Code of Conduct by this Committee, in consultation with the Independent Person, to ensure compliance with current best practice; and

(b).      that, upon adoption of any revised Code, the provision of training to all Authority Members on the revised Code in general and on the registration and declaration of interests in particular.