Code of Conduct Complaints Local Assessment Framework (08 May 2008 – 30 June 2009)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Allegation An allegation may be submitted by : Any Person. An allegation may be filed with the PLSB through: The Department of Education A Public.
Advertisements

PHILLIP FRENCH DIRECTOR AUSTRALIAN CENTRE FOR DISABILITY LAW 2012 Asserting human rights under the Optional Protocol.
What is involved in the planning process and who makes the decisions?
In confidence Chair: Storm Westmaas Principal Legal Adviser, the Standards Board for England Speakers: Bernadette Livesey Chief Law and Administration.
CODE OF CONDUCT NORTH WEST LEICESTERSHIRE THE CHANGES UNDER THE LOCALISM ACT North West Leicestershire District Council.
Keeping track of standards: Monitoring and support Chair: John Williams Senior Policy Adviser The Standards Board for England Speakers: Fiona McMillan.
The role of the Parish Clerk Local Determination of Complaints.
Delivering local determinations and setting sanctions Speakers: Simon Bird Deputy President The Adjudication Panel for England Mark Jones Principal Legal.
Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, West Bengal, Grievance Redressal Rules, 2009.
WEEK 9: DISMISSAL AS A RESULT OF MISCONDUCT 1. LEARNING OUTCOME The students will be able to; 2 1 Discuss the issue of dismissal as a result of misconduct(C4,P2,
An Introduction to the ABCD For the Casualty Actuarial Society Course on Professionalism Copyright © 2013 by the American Academy of Actuaries.
© 2007 itSMF USA. All rights reserved. itSMF USA Code of Ethics Overview October 2007.
“Student Due Process” School Administrators of South Dakota April 7, 2015.
REGULATION AND OPPORTUNITY JAY W. COAKLEY COAKLEY STRATEGIC SOLUTIONS LLC Overdraft Income.
Ballymena Spatial Planning Paul Duffy Planning Service.
Ottawa Police Service Chief’s Complaint Investigations Insp. T. Youngson-Larochelle and S/Sgt. M. Marin.
DEALING WITH HARASSMENT AND ABUSE COMPLAINTS Lt (NL) James Smith VANCOUVER ISLAND DIVISION.
1 Ethics in English local government Dr Gary Hickey Research and Monitoring Manager The Standards Board for England.
CHANGES TO THE OPEN MEETING LAW Prepared and presented by: Brian W. Riley, Esq. Kopelman and Paige, P.C.
April 2, 2007 Ontario Human Rights Commission Introduction to the Enhanced Complaints Process (ECP) – Pilot.
“Worldwide Review of the Profession” Competition & Regulatory Developments ALAN HUNTER.
Chairs’ Briefing Summer 2015 Transition. Agenda 1.An update on national changes and expectations for governance 2.The new Headteacher Standards and future.
The Revised Code of Conduct Training presentation for local authorities.
© May not be reproduced without permission of Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd 1 Financial Ombudsman Service Alison Hoyland Policy Unit Manager, Corporate.
Meeting your Legal Duty to Refer. ISA Bichard Inquiry Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 (SVGA) Our aim is to prevent unsuitable people from working.
Local Assessment of Code of Conduct Complaints. 2 Background  On 08 May 2008 – the local assessment of Code of Conduct complaints was implemented due.
Complaints and Monitoring (s.9 and 10) Malika Ladha PAAB Reviewer.
ROYAL BERKSHIRE FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE Code of Conduct - Briefing and Advice Caroline Redzikowska: Monitoring Officer Agenda Item 7.
Planning appeals Peter Ford Head of Development Management Planning Committee Training – 30 th July 2015.
OPEN UP! Introduction to handling Freedom of Information requests.
Draft Ethics Bylaws Current draft. The new code describes ethical behaviour Old A Member shall refrain from making false statements, written or oral,
1 Tees Valley Town and Parish Councils ETHICAL GOVERNANCE WORKSHOP 8 th May 2009 Kirsty Cole - Strategic Director (Customers and Resources) Newark & Sherwood.
What is The CCC?. The Competitions Control Committee.
Local Assessment of Code of Conduct Complaints. Background  On 08 May 2008 – the local assessment of Code of Conduct complaints was implemented due to.
LOCAL RESOLUTION PROCESS – PRACTICALITIES AND THE RCT EXPERIENCE – FUTURE ROLE? Paul Lucas Monitoring Officer Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council.
 Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 20 (Part XX) was proclaimed dealing with Violence Prevention in the Work Place.  Work Place Violence.
The Localism Act 2011 PROVISIONS IN RELATION TO STANDARDS Standards Committee 8 March 2012.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION An Important Piece of IFTA. THE NEW PROCESS Streamlined Dispute Resolution Committee Appeal to IFTA, Inc. Board of Trustees.
A&D 101 A Beginner’s Guide to understanding the A&D process.
Councillors allowances – their “pay” How allowances work All councillors are unsalaried but all are eligible for allowances Reflect the voluntary nature.
The Code of Conduct and standards arrangements Paul Hoey Natalie Ainscough.
1 IFAD consideration of a Code of Conduct for Executive Board Representatives Historical Background Presentation to an Informal Seminar of the Executive.
An Introduction to the ABCD For the Casualty Actuarial Society Course on Professionalism Copyright © 2015 American of Academy of Actuaries. All Rights.
Your Rights! An overview of Special Education Laws Presented by: The Individual Needs Department.
Bath and North East Somerset – The place to live, work and visit Instances where planning cases are referred to the Chair of the Development Management.
Safeguarding the public: Through ensuring Fitness to Practise.
Andy Wilson – Team Manager HR Education (School Teacher Appraisal) (England) Regulations 2012 A briefing for Heads and Governors.
January 2009: PRS Template Presentation PRS for Music Code of Conduct.
MEMBERS’ CODE OF CONDUCT NORTH WEST LEICESTERSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL TUESDAY 19 May 2015 WEDNESDAY 20 MAY 2015 THURSDAY 21 MAY 2015.
Undergraduate Honor System Annual Report 2016 Frank Jiang Undergraduate Student Attorney General ’17.
GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES
Fitness to Practise Dominique Chauwin
SAE Technical Committee Operating Policy – Member Code of Conduct
Court Cases and Dispute Resolution on Tax Matters
Public Services Ombudsman for Wales
Code of Ethics and Ethics Panel
Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Quality Workshop The Local Council Award Scheme is a great guide for good practice in our sector and a way for councils to build confidence in their.
The Economic Regulation of Transport Bill, 2018
Texas Secretary of State Elections Division
KOOYOORA LTD Michael Shand QC 2 August 2018 Conference
Katherine Edwards Colin Biggers & Paisley Lawyers
EEO MODULE 3: DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT PROCESSING
Written complaint about CSP member received by Complaints Co-ordinator
KOOYOORA LTD Michael Shand QC 5 December 2017
Georgiana Iorgulescu Executive Director Center for Legal Resources
New Special Education Teacher Webinar Series
WEEK 9: DISMISSAL AS A RESULT OF MISCONDUCT
Headteacher’s report July 2016.
Presentation transcript:

Code of Conduct Complaints Local Assessment Framework (08 May 2008 – 30 June 2009)

2 Complaints Received ( relating to members conduct / behaviour) Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council has received 11 complaints relating to members conduct since the introduction of the local assessment framework, 10 of the complaints were received before 15 November The last complaint was received on 24 April (36%) of the 11 complaints received were made against Parish / Town Councillors. 7 (64%) of the complaints received were made against Borough Councillors. 9 (82%) of the complaints received were made by the public and 2 (18%) by council members.

3 The Assessment Sub-Committee (meet to make an initial assessment of a complaint) The Assessment Sub-Committee met on 7 occasions to assess 11 complaints. No further action was agreed on 6 of the complaints received. 4 complaints were referred to the Monitoring Officer for local Investigation. Other action by the Monitoring Officer was agreed on the remaining complaint. The Standards Board for England guidance states the Assessment Sub-Committee should meet within 20 working days of receipt of a complaint. All of the Assessment Sub-Committee meetings were held within 20 working days of receiving a complaint.

4 The Review Sub-Committee ( meet if a review request is received from a complainant within 30 days of the date of a decision notice stating no further action). The Review Sub-Committee met on 3 occasions to review 4 requests. All 4 review requests were dismissed (i.e. no further action required). The Standards Board for England guidance states the Review Sub-Committee should meet within 3 months of receiving a review request. All the Review Sub-Committee meetings were held within 20 days of receiving a review request from the complainant.

5 The Consideration Sub-Committee (meet to consider an Investigating Officer’s report) The Consideration Sub-Committee have met on 3 occasions to consider 5 investigation reports. 2 reports from Standards Board for England complaints (pre 08 May 2008) and 3 reports (4 complaints) since the introduction of the local assessment framework. At each of these meetings the Investigating Officer gave an oral account of their investigation and answered questions from the Sub-Committee. The average length of time from the decision to refer to the date of the determination meeting was 156 days (excludes SBE cases (pre 08 May 08) / Hearing Sub-Committee determination). On 4 of the reports the Sub-Committee agreed (‘finding of acceptance’) with the Investigating Officer that the member investigated had not breached the Code. The Investigator in the remaining report (2 complaints) determined a breach had occurred; therefore the Sub-Committee referred the case for determination by the Standards Committee’s Hearing Sub-Committee.

6 The Hearing Sub-Committee (meet to consider the investigation report and any written or verbal representations from the parties involved). The Hearing Sub-Committee have met on one occasion (26/06/2009). The representations received at this meeting were from the Investigating Officer (verbally) and subject member (written). The Sub-Committee determined their finding of facts regarding the case and determined that a breach of the Code had occurred (failing to treat others with respect). A sanction was imposed which required the subject member to apologise to the complainant and to take part in Code of Conduct training, in order to avoid a one month partial suspension. The Sub-Committee further recommended that members be reminded that they should treat each other with respect. An application for permission to appeal against the Hearing Sub-Committee’s decision by the subject member was refused by the Adjudication Panel. None of the complaints received have been referred to either the SBE or the APE.

7 Standards Board for England (SBE) – Local Assessment Framework Statistics ( 08 May 2008 – 31 March 2009) A total of 2,863 Code of Code complaints were recorded with the SBE. The average recorded complaints per authority is 2 per quarter. The average number of cases per Unitary authority are: % of complaints made were by the public and 36% from council members, with the remaining 10% from a combination of Officers, Parish / Town Clerks, MP’s and Monitoring Officers. The average length of time from date of receipt to referral decision is 20 working days. However, 838 (31%) cases took longer than 20 working days.

8 Standards Board for England (SBE) – Local Assessment Framework Statistics ( 08 May 2008 – 31 March 2009) Of the 2,693 complaint referral decisions made: 52.5% - No further action 29.0% - Referred to Monitoring Officer for investigation 12.1% - Other Action 6.2% - Referred to SBE for investigation 0.2% - Referred to another authority 526 review requests were received with 384 of these being assessed. 94% remained no further action and 6% were referred for investigation either locally or by the SBE. A request for a review was received in 37% of cases where the initial assessment decision was no further action.

9 Standards Board for England (SBE) – Local Assessment Framework Statistics ( 08 May 2008 – 31 March 2009) 224 cases with investigation outcomes were recorded with the SBE. In 158 (71%) cases no breach had been found. In 56 (25%) of cases a breach of the Code was found and a penalty imposed. 10 (4%) further cases also found a breach of the Code although no further action was taken. The average length of time from the decision to refer to the date of the determination meeting was 100 days. The most frequent breaches of the Code were: Part 3(1)(a): You must treat others with respect (37 occurrences) Part 5: You must not conduct yourself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing your office or authority into disrepute (28 occurrences).