Committee on Standards in Public Life: Getting the balance right: Implementing standards of conduc…
R10-18
Published January 2005
Response position and delivery status are recorded separately. Acceptance does not establish implementation.
Recommendation (the Committee's words)
The amendment to Part III of the Local Government Act 2000 should: • Place a duty on the Standards Board for England to delegate the responsibility for initial sifting of complaints to individual local Standards Committees. The delegation should be subject to the operation within a national framework prescribed by the Standards Board (and based upon criteria used by the Standards Board in sifting and referrals) by which local Standards Committees can decide: (i) whether to investigate a complaint or not (and if not whether mediation or conciliation between parties or general action in relation to awareness and understanding of the Code is appropriate); (ii) which complaints are of such potential seriousness they should be referred for national investigation;
(iii) whether, following a local investigation, a complaint should be referred to the Adjudication Panel; or (iv) to hear and determine the case, with an appropriate penalty where necessary; or (v) accept that no breach has occurred; or (vi) to instruct the monitoring officer and/or Standards Committee chair to instigate mediation or conciliation between parties or general action in relation to awareness and understanding of the Code. • Introduce a requirement for Standards Committees to report annually to the Standards Board and full Council on the operation of the ethical framework; • Introduce a requirement for each Standards Committee and the Standards Boards to determine and publish targets for the completion of each stage in the complaints-handling process they are responsible for and to report on these as part of their respective annual reports; and • Provide a power for the Standards Board to audit the operation of the framework by a local Standards Committee and, if necessary following the audit, to remove the delegation until satisfied that necessary remedial action has been undertaken.
(iii) whether, following a local investigation, a complaint should be referred to the Adjudication Panel; or (iv) to hear and determine the case, with an appropriate penalty where necessary; or (v) accept that no breach has occurred; or (vi) to instruct the monitoring officer and/or Standards Committee chair to instigate mediation or conciliation between parties or general action in relation to awareness and understanding of the Code. • Introduce a requirement for Standards Committees to report annually to the Standards Board and full Council on the operation of the ethical framework; • Introduce a requirement for each Standards Committee and the Standards Boards to determine and publish targets for the completion of each stage in the complaints-handling process they are responsible for and to report on these as part of their respective annual reports; and • Provide a power for the Standards Board to audit the operation of the framework by a local Standards Committee and, if necessary following the audit, to remove the delegation until satisfied that necessary remedial action has been undertaken.
From: Committee on Standards in Public Life, Getting the balance right: Implementing standards of conduct in public life, January 2005
Government response
Government response (the government's words)
We accept the principle that the initial assessment of allegations against local authority members should be undertaken by local authorities. We also accept that the exercise of this provision should be within a framework operated by the Standards Board, and that the Board should provide advice and guidance to committees on the operation of the assessment process. There should also be provision for the Standards Board to investigate in certain cases, including allegations of a particularly serious nature or cases which might have a national significance or set an important precedent.
We accept that the powers provided to standards committees should be broadly in line with those suggested by the Committee. We will give further consideration to the detail of the provisions, for example, on the circumstances when a case should be referred by a committee back to the Standards Board for investigation.
We accept in principle the need to have appropriate reporting arrangements in place, so that the performance of standards committees can be effectively monitored and for the Board to be able to take appropriate action, for example, in terms of providing advice and support, or otherwise intervening, in cases where improvements in performance might be made.
We accept that the powers provided to standards committees should be broadly in line with those suggested by the Committee. We will give further consideration to the detail of the provisions, for example, on the circumstances when a case should be referred by a committee back to the Standards Board for investigation.
We accept in principle the need to have appropriate reporting arrangements in place, so that the performance of standards committees can be effectively monitored and for the Board to be able to take appropriate action, for example, in terms of providing advice and support, or otherwise intervening, in cases where improvements in performance might be made.
From: HM Government. Source document ↗