Issue - meetings

To review the conduct of staff involved in the Council’s proposals to build a waste transfer station at Lyme Green Depot.

At the request of the Chairman, Ms Henniker explained the process which would be adopted during this item of business for the Sub-Committee.  She informed the meeting of the paperwork which had been circulated to those present.

She added that, at the conclusion of the process which had been explained as part of Item 4 of the agenda, each officer would be individually called into the meeting in turn in order for the Chairman to advise them of the decisions of the Sub-Committee and should the decision be taken that one or more allegations should be referred to a DIP, they would be asked to confirm whether or not they objected to the preferred DIP.

Should a decision be taken to suspend any of the officers in question, or to take any alternative steps, that officer would be recalled in order to be given an opportunity to respond.  There would then be a further adjournment, during which the Sub-Committee would consider the submissions made.

The officer would then be recalled and advised of the Sub-Committee’s final decision.

If a decision was made to proceed with suspension, the Chairman of the Sub-Committee would announce the terms of suspension.

Discussion would take place on the proposed appointment of a DIP with a view to securing agreement amongst the officers concerned as to such appointment.

Ms Henniker set out in detail each of the allegations which would form the basis of the business of this item of the Sub-Committee’s agenda.

In accordance with the detailed procedure which was explained as part of Item 4 of the agenda, the officers would be invited to make submissions to the Sub-Committee.

In turn, the officers concerned were individually invited to address the meeting.

Each officer was asked to make their submissions to the meeting.  This was followed by questions from the members of the Sub-Committee where this was necessary for the purposes of clarification only.  Where any of the officers were accompanied by advisors, their advisors were entitled to attend this part of the proceedings and to contribute as they wished.  Whilst each of the officers made their presentations, the other officers withdrew from the meeting.

After all presentations had been made, the Sub-Committee considered all submissions in detail with a view to determining:

a.                  Whether the allegations in question required no further formal action to be taken;

b.                  Whether those allegations should be referred to a Designated Independent Person (DIP);

c.                  Whether suspension or alternative steps were appropriate.

RESOLVED

Following full consideration of the written and oral submissions of the officers concerned, and those of their advisors, together with the responses to the questions of clarification which were put to those present at the meeting, the Sub-Committee resolved that:

(1)               In respect of the allegations made as part of the proceedings, there were various allegations in relation to each officer which required no formal action under the procedure.

(2)               In respect of the allegations made as part of the proceedings, there were various allegations in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7