Agenda and minutes

To agree the procedures for the operation of hybrid meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the hybrid meeting procedures set out in the agenda be agreed.

To note the Committee’s terms of reference.

RESOLVED –

THAT the Committee’s terms of reference be noted.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Angela Mason and Luisa Porritt.

There were no declarations of interest.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: ‘In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to having your contributions recorded and broadcast, including video when switched on, and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.’

Any other announcements

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and could be viewed on the website for twelve months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts were archived and could be made available upon request.

Those who had asked to address the meeting were deemed to be consenting to having their contributions recorded and broadcast and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.

There were no deputations.

There was no urgent business.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 9 November 2020.

RESOLVED –

THAT, subject to the correction of Greater London Assembly to Greater London Authority on page 4, the minutes of the meeting held on 9^th November 2020 be approved and signed as a correct record.

Report of the Borough Solicitor

Following consultation, the Local Government Association (LGA) has published its new Model Councillor Code of Conduct. This report provides background to the new Model Code and makes initial recommendations for amendments to strengthen the Model Code in line with decisions taken by the Council over recent years. Officers will work with the Committee on drafting the Council’s new Code of Conduct, with the intention of referring to the Council to approve and adopt the updated Code into the Constitution later in the municipal year. The updated Code would then come into force following the local elections in 2022 and training provided as part of the induction programme.

Consideration was given to the report of the Borough Solicitor.

Members made the following comments:

·       Greater consistency between Codes in different local authorities was welcomed.

·       There was concern at whether the requirement to register non-pecuniary interests would be lost with the new categories of interests.

·       It was noted that, while the LGA Model Code included registering any gifts or hospitality with an estimated value of at least £50, the proposed updated Camden Code of Conduct retained the lower figure of £25.

·       Concern was expressed that the proposed Code did not require the declaration of membership of secret organisations such as the Freemasons. However, it was noted that Members had to declare membership of Trade Unions. It was suggested that Members be given guidance on this.

·       Further guidance was requested on Disclosable Pecuniary Interests such as the category on employment, office, trade, profession or vocation to address income through shareholdings where the body does not have a place of business or land in the area of the council. It was noted that there was no requirement for councillors to declare involvement in a company that was regularly bidding for Council contracts. It was also considered that there were different meanings regarding beneficial interest in land and property in the law compared with the standards regime.

·       It was queried whether councillors were supposed to declare contracts with the Council such as resident’s parking vouchers.

·       It was noted that the LGA had highlighted in its consultation response analysis that respondents had suggested the inclusion of membership of closed societies such as Freemasons. Officers were asked to find out why this had not been taken up.

·       Concern was expressed that, on page 62 of the agenda pack, wording regarding the LGA encouraging training had been deleted. An additional sentence setting out that the general principles were for guidance only, whereas the specific obligations set out instances where actions would be taken, was considered to be confusing.

·       The Independent Person considered that the switches between first person pronouns for obligations and second person pronouns for guidance was confusing although the intention by the LGA was understood.

In response to questions and comments, Andrew Maughan (Borough Solicitor) made the following comments:

·       It was clarified that the Other Registerable Interests were the equivalent of non-pecuniary interests, although more defined. It was acknowledged that the model Code used a different language with regard to Interests and that this would have to be understood by Members if the updated Code was adopted. However, it was also recognised that the terminology was strange and it was proposed that officers consider if a more familiar phrasing could be used.

ACTION: Borough Solicitor

·       The Disclosable Pecuniary Interests were statutory categories and while the Council could add to them, additional categories would not attract criminal sanctions.

·       It was considered that private shareholding was arguably caught by the Disclosable Pecuniary Interests as defined in law. Officers would review the queried interests and report back on whether they were caught within the updated Code of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Borough Solicitor

This report brings to Members’ attention recent standards news items for information and updates on actions from the previous Standards Committee meeting. 

Consideration was given to the report of the Borough Solicitor.

In response to a request, it was agreed that an update on the Committee on Standards in Public Life report ‘Upholding Standards in Public Life’ would be brought to the next meeting of Standards Committee.

RESOLVED –

THAT the Committee noted the contents of the report.

Report of the Borough Solicitor

This report sets out the record of standards information and guidance issued to Members of the Council. 

Consideration was given to the report of the Borough Solicitor.

Members made the following comments:

·       It was suggested that officers review whether the reported record should be limited to a specific period of time.

·       Standards training for the new Council was required and all Groups should commit to ensuring that their Members participate.

·       There was a request for some of the induction to be recorded for viewing at a later date.

·       Issues such as racism and sexism should be addressed in the broader induction programme.

·       Pre-election guidance would be welcomed, including reassurance that there would be no restrictions on Covid-19 communications.

In response to questions and comments, Andrew Maughan (Borough Solicitor) made the following comments:

·       The induction programme would be brought to the Committee in the New Year. Following the last election, the programme included an induction event on Saturday, including standards issues, and a compulsory session on the Code of Conduct on the Wednesday after Election Day. Information on the rest of the induction programme would also be presented as there was some relevance to the Committee, for example training on Planning Committee addressed bias and predetermination.

·       The Committee was informed that a decision was required as to whether to hold training remotely or in person. If the training was remote it would be easy to record it.

·       It was confirmed that equalities would be addressed in the induction programme. Any suggestions for the induction programme could be fed in through officers and Group Whips.

·       A reminder on pre-election expectations could be provided in January but it was confirmed that public health messaging would be not be affected by restrictions on communications.

ACTION: Borough Solicitor

RESOLVED –

THAT the Committee noted the record of standards guidance.

There was no urgent business.