Agenda and minutes

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any personal and/or prejudicial interests in any item on the agenda

No declarations of interest were made.

In accordance with Procedure Rules Nos.11 and 35 a total period of 10 minutes is allocated for members of the public to address the Committee on any matter relevant to the work of the Committee.

Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes but the Chairman will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned where there are a number of speakers.

Members of the public wishing to ask a question at the meeting should provide at least three clear working days’ notice in writing and should include the question with that notice. This will enable an informed answer to be given.  It is not required to give notice of the intention to make use of public speaking provision, however, as a matter of courtesy, a period of 24 hours notice is encouraged.

In accordance with Procedure Rules Nos. 11 and 35, a total period of 10 minutes was allocated for members of the public to address the Committee on any matter relevant to its work.

There were no members of the public in attendance and the Committee proceeded to its next item of business.

The reports relating to the remaining items on the agenda have been withheld from public circulation and deposit pursuant to Section 100(B)(2) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the matters may be determined with the press and public excluded.

The Committee may decide to exclude the press and public from the meeting during consideration of the following item pursuant to Section 100(A)4 of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 7c of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 and public interest would not be served in publishing the information.

RESOLVED:  That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item pursuant to Section 100(A)4 of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1, 2 and 7c of part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 and the public interest would not be served in publishing the information.

To consider a report from Standards for England following the referral of complaint No. CEC/2010/06 against a serving Cheshire East Councillor.

The Committee received a report from Standards for England following the referral of a complaint against a serving Cheshire East Councillor. The Ethical Standards Officer (ESO) appointed to carry out the investigation had concluded that under Section 59(4)(a) of the Local Government Act 2000 (as amended) the Subject Member had not failed to comply with the Code of Conduct of Cheshire East Council.

The Monitoring Officer explained the procedures which had been followed by the Council when the complaint was received and the Assessment Sub-Committee’s reasons for referring it to Standards for England.

The Monitoring Officer also explained how Standards for England had carried out the investigation and the processes followed in producing the report.  It was noted that the decision of the ESO was final in relation to the finding that there had been no breach of the Code.  

The ESO had issued her final report to the Standards Committee in accordance with the powers given to her in Section 64(3)(a) of the Local Government Act 2000 which allowed her to forward her report if she considered that it would assist the Committee in the discharge of its functions under that Act. 

Members discussed the report from which it was felt the following lessons could be drawn: 

(1)               Public perception was of paramount importance. When entering public life, elected Members, in all their dealings, need to ask themselves “how does this look to the local community and Council-tax payers?”

(2)               When forming friendships with individuals/organisations which in turn had business with the authority, elected Members needed  to be open and transparent about such associations.

(3)       Councillors were never “off duty” and should be mindful of their behaviour at all times .

(4)               It was essential to ensure that Members were fully aware of the significance of public office and the expectations of their constituents and the wider community in fulfilling their role in a diligent and selfless manner. 

(5)               The Subject Member was a long-standing experienced Councillor and this highlighted the need for rigorous Code of Conduct training for all Members on a regular basis. 

(6)               The Planning Protocol, which ensured the preservation of the integrity of the planning system as open and fair to all parties,  could be included as part of the Code of Conduct training.

(7)               Effective communication was significantly important to try to dispel negative public perception and perhaps the Council could consider this matter.

(8)               The ESO had made comment that senior Officers and other Members had understandable concerns about the public perception of the relationship of the Subject Member with the developer. The Committee agreed that the Officers had acted entirely appropriately in the circumstances and endorsed the comments made by the ESO and the action taken by Officers.

RESOLVED:

(a)               That the report be received;

(b)               That the comments made above at 1–8 be supported and commended as “lessons learned” to inform any appropriate training for Members; and

(c)               That Council be invited to give  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.