As part of the process of introducing speakers to stimulate discussion about the role of the Standards Committee, Alison Broom, the Chief Executive of Maidstone Borough Council, addressed the meeting on the topical issue of standards in public life.  She commented that:-

·  Clearly, the Standards Committee was an important part of the framework for ensuring standards at Maidstone Borough Council, but she thought that there were wider issues of ethics, community leadership, reputation and reputation management.

·  There was uncertainty about what, if anything, would replace the current Standards framework.  However, in her view, creating a culture which engendered public trust in the workings of local government was the starting point.  The Standards framework provided a safety net with procedures to deal with complaints of Member misconduct and inappropriate behaviour.  It was important for people to have trust and confidence that those responsible for governance and the delivery of services would act in the interests of the public and for the long term public good.  Trust in the probity and honesty of Members and Officers was very important.  The public expected Members and Officers to act with authenticity, integrity and honesty.  They expected high standards from those in public life as demonstrated by the concerns expressed about MPs’ expenses, the focus on the use of resources which had intensified as a result of public spending reductions and the interest in electoral issues.

·  The Council’s arrangements for achieving high standards in decision making included employing people with the appropriate expertise to provide advice; ensuring openness and transparency in decision making; having mechanisms in place for holding decision makers to account; and careful monitoring and use of feedback about standards of service from, for example, complaints and Ombudsman investigations.

·  The Council’s arrangements for ensuring high standards of behaviour included promoting good conduct to increase public confidence; adopting and promoting the Code of Conduct; providing training; and maintaining the Register of Interests for Members and Officers.

·  There were mechanisms in place to enable the public to complain about service provision, the decision making process and inappropriate Member behaviour.

·  A significant number of decisions were delegated to Officers and it was important to create the right environment for ethical behaviour in the decision making process, and to make clear that high standards were required.

·  With regard to the proposed changes to the Standards regime set out in the Localism Bill, there would seem to be merit in retaining some sort of Code of Conduct to guide Members and to deal with inappropriate Member behaviour; for example, in terms of behaviour towards Officers.

During the ensuing discussion, reference was made to:-

·  The likely public reaction to the anticipated abolition of the requirement to have a Code of Conduct.

·  The need for some sort of Code of Conduct to guide Members, but this should not be as complex as the current one.

·  The need for a protocol for dealing with complaints of Member misconduct quickly and cost effectively, with less bureaucracy, an emphasis on mediation, and including an independent element to maintain public trust and confidence.

·  The merits of retaining a small group of Members (including Independent Members) with the expertise and skills to look into complaints of Member misconduct as and when required.

·  The implications for Parish Councils, particularly in terms of whether to adopt a voluntary Code of Conduct and if so, its contents; training; and dealing with complaints of Member misconduct.

The Committee thanked the Chief Executive for an interesting discussion.