Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

To elect a Chairman for this meeting only.

Resolved:

To elect Councillor Trevor Carbin as Chairman for this meeting only.

Resolved:

To elect Councillor Trevor Carbin as Chairman for this meeting only.

To receive any declarations of disclosable interests or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.

There were no interests declared.

There were no interests declared.

a)    To note the procedure for the meeting.

b)    To note the local assessment criteria to be used in assessing the complaint.

The meeting procedure and assessment criteria were noted.

The meeting procedure and assessment criteria were noted.

To consider passing the following resolution:

To agree that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to exclude the public from the meeting for the business specified in Item Number 5  because it is likely that if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act and the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information to the public.

Paragraph 1 - information relating to an individual

Resolved:

To agree that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to exclude the public from the meeting for the business specified in Minute No.25  because it is likely that if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act and the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information to the public.

Paragraph 1 - information relating to an individual

Report

Appendix 1a- Complaint

Appendix 1b- Supplementary Information

Appendix 1c- Code of Conduct Paragraphs breached

Appendix 1d- Subject Member Response

Appendix 2- Initial Assessment

Appendix 3- Request for Review

The Sub-Committee considered a complaint against Councillor Ruth Lamdin of Fyfield and West Overton Parish Council, alleging she had breached her council’s code of conduct in that the Parish Council had not adhered to the Transparency Code in that minutes/reports/agendas are not published to the public domain within the time scale stipulated by the Code, and further that the Parish Council has failed to meet an earlier reassurance given that a memorial tree would not be planted close to a memorial seat but then going ahead and planting the tree 10 feet away from the seat.

The Sub-Committee went through the initial tests required by the local assessment criteria. They were in agreement that the complaint related to the subject member, that they were in office at the time of the alleged incident, and were acting in their capacity as a councillor. The final test was whether, if proven, the alleged actions were capable of breaching the Code of Conduct of the Parish Council.

In reaching its decision the Sub-Committee relied upon the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the subject member, the initial assessment and the additional information submitted by the complainant in their request for a review of the initial assessment decision to take no further action.

The complaint had arisen principally over disagreement with a decision of the parish council regarding siting of a memorial tree, and its alleged impact upon a commemorative seat nearby, as well as a claim the council had not abided by its codes regarding publication of minutes and agendas.

The Sub-Committee was in agreement with the reasoning of the deputy monitoring officer that publication of minutes and agendas relate to processes of the parish council and therefore were not within the remit of the Sub-Committee to consider.

The complaint regarding the decision of the parish council in respect of the memorial tree would also not be covered by the standards regime, only whether the behaviour of the subject member in their interactions around that decision were a possible breach of some element of their Code of Conduct. The Sub-Committee did accept there had been some confusion between the parties in the interactions regarding whether the decision to site the tree had already been taken and there was dispute over what the subject member had told the complainant during those interactions.

Nevertheless, the Sub-Committee upheld the reasoning and the initial assessment decision of the Deputy Monitoring Officer to dismiss the complaint. While the subject member may not have been as clear as they could have been during the discussions with the complainants regarding the decision of the parish council, that decision itself was not challengeable as a Code of Conduct matter, and even if the allegations of the behaviour of the subject member in discussing that decision were proven, these would not rise to the level of a breach.

It was noted the complainant in their request for a review had stated they were minded to accept the decision of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.