Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Members are required to notify any substitutions by midday on the day of the meeting.

Late substitutions will not be accepted and Members attending as a substitute without having given the due notice will not be able to take part in the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Vijaiya Poopalasingham, Chris Lucas, Caroline McDonnell, Dominic Griffiths and Val Bryant.

Audio recording – 1 minute 00 seconds

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Vijaiya Poopalasingham, Chris Lucas, Caroline McDonnell, Dominic Griffiths and Val Bryant.

Having given due notice, Councillor Paul Ward substituted for Councillor Lucas.

Councillor Elizabeth Dennis was absent.

To take as read and approve as a true record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on the 5 March 2025.

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 5 March 2025, as amended, be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

Audio Recording – 1 minutes 25 seconds

The Independent Person noted that the attendees included Ms Wai Bing Hui, who was not present at the previous meeting, and should instead have been Mr Patrick Hodson. There was also a typo in response to a question, which should read ‘struck’ instead of ‘stuck’.

Councillor Ian Albert, as Chair, proposed the Minutes with the above amendments and Councillor Keith Hoskins seconded and, following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED:That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 5 March 2025, as amended, be approved as a true record of the proceedings and be signed by the Chair.

Members should notify the Chair of other business which they wish to be discussed at the end of either Part I or Part II business set out in the agenda. They must state the circumstances which they consider justify the business being considered as a matter of urgency.

The Chair will decide whether any item(s) raised will be considered.

There was no other business notified.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 01 seconds

There was no other business notified.

Members are reminded that any declarations of interest in respect of any business set out in the agenda, should be declared as either a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or Declarable Interest and are required to notify the Chair of the nature of any interest declared at the commencement of the relevant item on the agenda.  Members declaring a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest must withdraw from the meeting for the duration of the item. Members declaring a Declarable Interest, wishing to exercise a ‘Councillor Speaking Right’, must declare this at the same time as the interest, move to the public area before speaking to the item and then must leave the room before the debate and vote.

(1)  The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council policy this meeting would be recorded.

(2)  The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(3)  The Chair advised for the purpose of clarification Clause 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution did not apply to this meeting.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 03 seconds

(1)   The Chair advised that, in accordance with Council policy this meeting would be recorded.

(2)   The Chair drew attention to the item on the agenda front pages regarding Declarations of Interest and reminded Members that, in line with the Code of Conduct, any Declarations of Interest needed to be declared immediately prior to the item in question.

(3)   The Chair advised for the purpose of clarification Clause 4.8.23(a) of the Constitution does not apply to this meeting.

To receive petitions, comments and questions from the public.

There was no public participation.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 46 seconds

There was no public participation.

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – GOVERNANCE AND MONITORING OFFICER

The report updates Members of the Committee on standards issues locally and nationally. It contains a summary of the complaints received for the year 2025 thus far, as well as any other relevant issues that have arisen between Committee meetings.

RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the content of the report and made suggestions on future actions.

REASON FOR DECISION: To ensure good governance within the Council and keep the Committee abreast of changes locally and nationally.

Audio recording – 3 minutes 51 seconds

The Monitoring Officer presented the report entitled ‘Standards Matters Report’ and advised that:

·       Since publication of the report, there had been 5 further complaints received regarding Councillors. This reflected a sector-wide trend, with more public awareness of the standards regimes in place and less tolerance for poor behaviour.

·       The Complaints Handling Procedure was clear in how complaints were processed. Once the complaint was received, this would be assessed against the Code of Conduct and procedures. This would also involve potentially meeting with the complainant and the subject and review of any relevant correspondence and paperwork. The outcome of this investigation stage would then be shared with the Independent Person to assess the validity of the complaint.

·       All complaints received were logged on a spreadsheet for auditing purposes, including the actions taken, or why a complaint was not taken forward. These were then reported to the Standards Committee.

·       It was important that the complaints procedure at the Council was robust, credible and defensible.

·       The English Devolution Bill would not automatically change the Code of Conduct for Councillors but would emphasise the need for accountability and ensuring framework was in place to deal with complaints effectively.

·       There was a Monitoring Officer protocol for consideration at this meeting, which would be referred onto Full Council for consideration before adoption into the Constitution.

The following Members asked questions:

·       Councillor Ralph Muncer

·       Councillor Paul Ward

In response to questions, the Monitoring Officer advised that:

·       If a complaint was regarding an Officer, it would not be reported to this Committee, but would be dealt with by the line manager and HR.

·       There were processes in place, as outlined under the 3Cs policy, for members of the public to make complaints about Officers, and ultimately the Local Government Ombudsman.

·       When a complaint was received, it would be triaged by the Monitoring Officer. If further information was required, then this would be sought from the complainant through email, calls and written letters. Should no response be received to these requests, then the complainant would receive a warning that the case would be closed without further detail.

Councillor Ian Albert, as Chair, proposed and Councillor Keith Hoskins seconded and, following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the content of the report and made suggestions on future actions.

REASON FOR DECISION: To ensure good governance within the Council and keep the Committee abreast of changes locally and nationally.

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – GOVERNANCE AND MONITORING OFFICER

To provide the Committee with an updated guidance document on the duties, obligations and liabilities that Councillor’s will have if they are appointed to (or are on) an outside body, highlighting the main changes to the previous guidance.

RECOMMENDED TO FULL COUNCIL: That Full Council approve and adopt the updated guidance for Councillors.  

REASONS FOR REFERRAL:

(1)  The Council’s current guidance to Councillors on Outside Bodies was last updated in 2016.

(2)  A full review of the guidance to Councillors on outside bodies has been necessary to ensure:

a.    Councillors are aware of their liabilities based on the type of organisation which they are appointed to and the risks associated with these appointments both to the Councillor and the Council.

b.    That the guidance available to Councillors aligns with the updated statutory position and also best practice.

Audio recording – 10 minutes 47 seconds

The Monitoring Officer presented the report entitled ‘Adoption of Updated Guidance to Councillor on Outside Bodies’ and advised that:

·        The guidance document would provide clear and practical guidance to Members appointed to Outside Bodies, including expectations, liabilities and responsibilities.

·        The previous guidance was updated in 2016 and therefore this update was required to bring the guidance in line with current practices, especially given the increase in partnership working.

·        There was no change to the overall principles of the previous guidance, but it simplified the information to make it easier for Members to understand their responsibilities as appointees on Outside Bodies.

·        If approved at Full Council, the guidance would be circulated to all Members and would be included within the Constitution.

The following Members asked questions:

·        Councillor Ian Albert

·        Councillor Sean Nolan

·        Councillor Paul Ward

·        Councillor Ian Mantle

In response to questions, the Monitoring Officer advised that:

·        Training could be provided on this as part of the next Code of Conduct training session for Members. This would help to understand requirements of any specific appointment, but the guidance document included practical examples to simplify the overall process for Members.

·        Members should contact the Monitoring Officer with any specific questions on interests related to Outside Body appointments.

·        If there was a potential conflict identified, then this would be addressed with the Member. It was important that Members understood when they were able, or not able, to take part in Council business related to Outside Bodies.

·        The guidance would apply to appointees of charities and charitable organisations, and this was detailed in the document.

·        Information regarding the position of the appointed Member on an Outside Body could be included within the paperwork completed ahead of the Annual Council meeting.

The Independent Person noted that he commended the document for adoption and that it would support with the assessment of complaints received and understanding any potential conflict of interests.

Councillor Ian Albert, as Chair, proposed and Councillor Keith Hoskins seconded and, following a vote, it was:

RECOMMENDED TO FULL COUNCIL: That Full Council approve and adopt the updated guidance for Councillors.  

REASONS FOR REFERRAL:

(1)   The Council’s current guidance to Councillors on Outside Bodies was last updated in 2016.

(2)   A full review of the guidance to Councillors on outside bodies has been necessary to ensure:

a.     Councillors are aware of their liabilities based on the type of organisation which they are appointed to and the risks associated with these appointments both to the Councillor and the Council.

b.     That the guidance available to Councillors aligns with the updated statutory position and also best practice.

REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR – GOVERNANCE AND MONITORING OFFICER

To provide the Committee with a proposed Monitoring Officer protocol and to note the recent guidance document on the Golden Triangle and consider the recommendation to Full Council that the protocol be adopted into the Council’s Constitution.  

RESOLVED: That the Committee noted the guidance attached at Appendix 2 titled ‘The Golden Triangle: Governance Roles and Responsibilities’.

RECOMMENDED TO FULL COUNCIL: That Full Council approve and adopt the Monitoring Officer Protocol into the Constitution, subject to the comments and changes put forward by the Standards Committee.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

(1)  The role of the Monitoring Officer has expanded over recent years. Monitoring Officers are also required to act as consultants to anyone within the Council on matters of legality, maladministration, and impropriety.

(2)  It is therefore considered that it would be good practice for the Council to introduce an appropriate Protocol.

(3)  In August 2025, Lawyers in Local Government (LLG), the Chartered Institute for Public Finance & Accountancy (CIPFA) and the Society for Local Authority Chief Executives & Senior Managers (SOLACE) collaborated to produce a new guide: ‘The Golden Triangle: Governance Roles and Responsibilities’ (attached at Appendix 2). Members are invited to give consideration to this guidance to enhance their overall understanding of the interwoven nature of the roles of the three statutory officers within the Council.

Audio recording – 20 minutes 06 seconds

The Monitoring Officer presented the report entitled ‘Adoption of the Monitoring Officer Protocol’ and advised that:

·       In recent years there had been more of an emphasis placed on ethical conduct, and this document sought to formalise how this worked at North Herts Council and outlined how the roles can be carried out effectively and independently.

·       It would help to ensure that the role of the Monitoring Officer was understood by all, including Members, Officers and the public, and would embed the ‘Golden Triangle’ of roles within the Constitution.

The following Members asked questions:

·       Councillor Ralph Muncer

·       Councillor Paul Ward

·       Councillor Ian Albert

In response to questions, the Monitoring Officer advised that:

·       The term ‘reportable instances’ related to something which was reportable to the Monitoring Officer, which would cover Councillor Complaints, as well as other areas such as whistleblowing and safeguarding.

·       If a complaint was received in relation to a politically charged matter, it may be best to refer the matter out to a neighbouring authority to ensure that there was a level of independence in the assessment of the complaint. This was allowed under the Complaints Handling Procedure.

·       The Monitoring Officer role was appointed under the 1989 Act and the role was required to ensure all decisions of the Council were made lawfully. The Monitoring Officer should review and approve all decisions before being taken and no other Officer is able to do that within their role. Therefore, the Monitoring Officer role was described as ‘front and centre’ so that colleagues understood the oversight role of the Monitoring Officer within the decision making process of the Council.

·       There were clear examples from other authorities where the role of the Monitoring Officer in decision making was unclear and the consequences this can have on the authority.

·       The Monitoring Officer was not required to have oversight of decisions taken at Parish level.

·       However, the Monitoring Officer was responsible for complaints made against Parish Councillors. The Complaints Handling Procedure outlined the need to assess and investigate complaints relating to Parish Councillors, and whilst a local resolution would be sought in the first instance, if this was not possible the normal criteria would apply for assessing these complaints.

·       Should a complaint be received against a Parish clerk, this would be an employee matter as the clerk is not an elected position and therefore not covered by the Code of Conduct, and the Monitoring Officer would not be involved in these matters.

·       The adoption of this Protocol into the Constitution would be for Full Council to consider and approve before formal incorporation.

As part of the debate, Councillor Ralph Muncer suggested that additional clarity should be added to make it clear what a ‘reportable incident’ was and that examples of when neighbouring authorities may be required to assist in assessments of complaints received should be included in the Protocol document.

Ahead of the vote, the Independent Person noted that there were small errors on pages 41 and 42  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.