Memorandum by the Standards Board for
England (STA 02)
This Memorandum is submitted on behalf of The
Standards Board for England in response to the invitation contained
in the Committee's press notice of 15 September 2004 for written
evidence by 29 October 2004 on the four points set out in the
notice for a new inquiry into the role and effectiveness of The
Standards Board for England.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. The Standards Board for England (the
Board) welcomes this opportunity to report on the progress with
the code of conduct introduced by the Local Government Act 2000
("the Act") and to reflect on the role played by the
Board in administering the ethical framework.
2. The Board is committed to achieving the
right balance between its national regulatory role and local ownership
of the code. The Board's research shows wide acceptance of the
code of conduct in local authorities and growing evidence of the
cultural change necessary to raise and maintain ethical standards.
3. The judgements of the Board's ethical
standards officers have been largely confirmed by the sanctions
imposed on members guilty of misconduct by the Adjudication Panel
for England and the local standards committees. These sanctions
will continue to be publicised to reinforce the message that the
Board will act against those members who breach the code and thus
disrupt the good governance of local authorities.
4. The regulatory framework will be completed
on 4 November 2004 and will enable the Board to refer some cases
for local investigation and focus investigations on the more serious
cases that have the most potential to harm local democracy. The
Board will continue to apply the principles of proportionality,
fairness and consistency in the investigation process.
5. The Board intends to deploy resources,
as they become available, to meet the growing demand for support,
training and guidance to enable authorities to establish robust
and sustainable local ethical frameworks that ensure confidence
in local democracy. The Board will continue its work with regulatory
and other partners to deliver this aim.
6. The Board intends to consult on a review
of the code of conduct next year to review experience and examine
ways in which it can be improved or clarified.
BACKGROUND
7. The First Report of the Committee on
Standards in Public Life published in 1995 identified that: "In
certain circumstances an independent body to oversee the framework
within which actions are taken to monitor compliance can be an
important safeguard in maintaining public confidence". The
Board was established under the Act to perform such a role and
was formally constituted in March 2001 as an autonomous public
body, independent of the Crown, to investigate allegations that
members have breached the code of conduct. In carrying out its
duties the Board must have regard to the need to "promote
and maintain high standards of conduct by members and co-opted
members of relevant authorities In England".[1]
8. The Board's mission is to be the respected
body responsible for promoting ethical behaviour and building
confidence in local democracy. It employs some 120 people, has
an annual budget of around £9 million and is sponsored by
the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM).
9. The model code of conduct referred to
in the Act was drafted by the then Department of Environment,
Transport and the Regions in consultation with a number of local
government representative organisations. It was brought into force
by a series of statutory instruments in November 2001 and replaced
the old national code of conduct which was described by the Third
Report from the Committee Into Standards in Public Life as "confusing
and unsatisfactory". Today the mandatory code applies to
over 100,000 members of parish councils, principal councils, fire
and police authorities and the seven national park authorities.
10. The Board has a duty to appoint ethical
standards officers to investigate independently more serious allegations
of misconduct. The Board's work in 2003-04 has resulted in an
average of one member a week being suspended where his or her
behaviour has had the potential to tarnish the reputations of
everyone involved in local government. The Board also has a duty
to provide authoritative guidance and support to relevant local
authorities.
11. In its three year tenure the Board has
established the resources and essential networks to discharge
its statutory functions and has been encouraged by confirmation
of ownership and compliance with the code in local government.
Initially the Board had no reliable indication of the number of
complaints likely to be made under the code and the lacuna left
by a lack of powers to refer cases for local investigation and
determination resulted in an incoherent framework for the proportionate
operation of powers. In practise the caseload from complaints
received by the Board under the code has been significantly greater
than anyone had predicted. Additionally, until the new regulations
come into force on 4 November 2004 the Board has operated without
the powers for ethical standards officers to refer cases for local
investigation which has inevitably increased the pressure on the
Board's investigative resources.
THE EFFECTIVENESS
OF THE
STANDARDS BOARD
FOR ENGLAND
IN PROMOTING
AND OVERSEEING
THE CODE
OF CONDUCT
THAT SETS
OUT THE
RULES GOVERNING
THE BEHAVIOUR
OF LOCAL
AUTHORITIES
12. The Board has used the code as a regulatory
tool that can be administered in a flexible and pragmatic manner
to promote member adherence to high standards of conduct. The
Board is committed to providing consistent, relevant and timely
advice on the code. This is achieved by delivering local presentations
on key issues to elected members, independent standards committee
members and officers, and undertaking research and seeking feedback
from target audiences. Additionally, the Board has built networks
and partnerships with local and national stakeholders.
PROMOTING THE
CODE AND
CREATING AWARENESS
AMONG STAKEHOLDERS
13. The Board has, within a relatively short
time, established a firm reputation for providing high quality
clear and concise guidance on relevant issues, in addition to
giving an effective and timely response to day-to-day enquiries.
The wide range of issues covered by this guidance can be found
in the bibliography at Appendix 1 to this Memorandum. The guidance
is disseminated to members, monitoring officers, standards committees
and other key stakeholders and made accessible to all on the Board's
website at www.standardsboard.co.uk. The Board has published nine
documents covering such issues as handling cases locally, understanding
the code of conduct and learning from cases. Feedback and independent
research has given the Board confidence that this aspect of its
work is both valuable and valued by the stakeholder community.
It has helped improve awareness and quality of the ethical environment
in local government.
14. In addition to the published documents,
the Board's website contains responses to frequently asked questions,
case summaries, presentations from key events and an outline of
partnership arrangements with other public bodies and interest
groups. Two case reviews have also been published to share experience
of conducting investigations, giving advice and developing policy
in relation to the code of conduct.
15. Members and officers of the Board carry
out a continuing programme of countrywide presentations to explain
the provisions of the code and the work of the Board to its key
stakeholders and to update them on new developments. The Board
has also hosted three well-attended Annual Assemblies of Standards
Committees, the most recent in September 2004. Members of standards
committees, monitoring officers and local authority chief executives
were given the opportunity to hear views across the local government
sector and share best practice and experiences in a series of
workshops.
16. Amongst the themes discussed at the
conference was the link between high standards and excellent service
delivery. In its report "Corporate Governance—Improvement
and Trust in Local Public Services", the Audit Commission
highlights how the governance of local authorities has improved
following the Local Government Act 2000 due in part to the code
of conduct. Research undertaken by the Audit Commission[2]
shows the link between effective corporate governance and good
service provision. The conference overwhelmingly endorsed the
proposition that ethical standards are linked to excellent services.
Stakeholder perceptions—measuring the Board's
success
17. The Board commissions a programme of
research each year to monitor progress, measure stakeholder satisfaction
and gauge the main ethical concerns. This programme is specifically
designed to measure change in the ethical environment over time.
18. MORI research commissioned by the Board
in 2003 into satisfaction with the Board's support and guidance
to key stakeholders has found, for example, that 99% of all local
monitoring officers, over 90% of standards committee members and
85% of members of principal authorities support the requirement
for members to sign the code of conduct. The code of conduct is
now widely considered to be essential and has received broad support
from all tiers of local government. The research also found that
80% of respondents from principal authorities and 70% of respondents
from the parish sector believe that maintaining high standards
in local government is one of the most important issues facing
local government.
19. MORI also reported that the guidance
produced by the Board is often cited as one of the most positive
aspects of the Board's work. Some 69% of respondents felt that
the Board had been successful in keeping them personally informed
and that the Board had successfully defined standards of behaviour
for members. The survey also provided evidence of the usefulness
of the range of publications produced by the Board. Town and parish
councils have the least resources to deal with information and
communications, and the dissemination of materials could take
several weeks in some authorities. The Board is working with these
authorities to identify ways of ensuring quicker and easier access
to the relevant information.
20. The Board takes encouragement from these
findings that the code has become an accepted part of the ethical
framework for maintaining high standards in local government and
that there is a high level of satisfaction among stakeholders
in the guidance and support provided by the Board.
21. There is evidence that public awareness
is increasing about the role of the Board and the complaints process,
with 61% of allegations to the Board now coming from the general
public. Conversely, this may be seen as a measure of the task
ahead in building public confidence in local democracy.
Review of the Code of Conduct
22. The Board was among a wide range of
bodies including 50 local authorities, standards committees and
others that gave evidence to the Committee on Standards in Public
Life's Tenth Inquiry "Getting the Balance Right: Implementing
Standards of Conduct in Public Life" chaired by Sir Alistair
Graham. Sir Alistair gave a keynote address to delegates at the
Board's conference in September 2004 in which he indicated that
there was broad support for:
— an overarching statutory ethical
standards framework;
— a model code of conduct applicable
to all tiers of local government; and
— a national investigative and guidance
body.
23. In giving evidence to the Committee
the Board indicated the need for a review of the code and now
intends to conduct a full public consultation exercise on a review
of the code in the New Year, on the invitation of the Minister
of Local and Regional Government at the Board's Annual Assembly
in September 2004. The Board will take the opportunity to review
the effectiveness of the code and see if there are ways in which
it could be improved or clarified, with a view to making recommendations
for revisions to the Minister in 2005.
THE ROLE
OF THE
STANDARDS BOARD
FOR ENGLAND
IN ENSURING
LOCAL AUTHORITIES
ADHERE TO
A CODE
OF CONDUCT
AND ITS
ABILITY TO
ASSESS ALLEGATIONS
OF MISCONDUCT
IN A
TIMELY AND
FAIR WAY
24. The main statutory function of the Board
is to investigate complaints about alleged breaches of the code
of conduct where appropriate. A total of 63 referral, investigations
and legal staff work directly on cases and have an average of
over seven years each of experience in local government and/or
regulatory bodies.
Local determinations and investigations—Section
66 Regulations
25. The delay in introducing regulations
for handling cases at a local level meant that the Board initially
had to deal with all investigations against members with insufficient
resources to meet the demand. Ethical standards officers were
overloaded with cases and inundated with less significant complaints
without the power to refer matters locally. Although standards
committees had been established in August 2001 their powers did
not extend to the determination of cases referred by ethical standards
officers until June 2003. Until that time ethical standards officers
had little option but to decide "no further action"
in the case of more minor breaches of the code. The Board has
since been given additional resources and has been able to direct
more of its resources towards dealing with investigations and
improving the throughput of cases, conscious of the need to build
stakeholder confidence in the new ethical framework.
26. The Board remains fully committed to
the principle that local issues should be dealt with at a local
level wherever possible. Once the second set of regulations are
enacted, ethical standards officers will be able to refer appropriate
cases for local investigation and hearings. The Board aims to
support and make its expertise available to monitoring officers
and standards committees to enable the Board to concentrate its
investigative resources on the more serious cases and to help
maintain confidence in the process by ensuring consistency of
treatment between those cases investigated locally and those undertaken
centrally.
Investigation referral criteria
27. The Board has a duty to consider all
allegations received about members' conduct, but exercises its
discretion to refer only the more serious allegations for investigation.
The referral criteria attached at Appendix 2 to this Memorandum
are applied to all complaints received; these have been further
strengthened to discourage trivial, malicious or tit for tat complaints,
and reject allegations made solely for political point-scoring.
As a result, referrals for investigation have fallen from 45%
in 2002-03 and 34% in 2003-04, to a current average, of 27% of
the total number of complaints received during this financial
year.
28. As a planning assumption, the Board
expects to be referring around 30% of the 300 complaints received
each month to be investigated, either centrally or at a local
level. The average time taken from receipt of a complaint to referral
for investigation is now 12 days. Active steps are being taken
to reduce this time yet further to around 10 days.
Investigations into allegations of misconduct
29. It was essential as the Board set about
its task that the investigation process was carefully tested so
as to ensure absolute fairness and integrity was exercised throughout
the whole process. Inevitably, at the commencement, this was a
painstaking process which could only be speeded up as more experience
was gained. It was important to the Board that this process should
be able to stand the test of external scrutiny including judicial
review particularly as it was dealing with the integrity and good
name of politically active members of the community who, above
all, needed to have confidence in this process.
30. The Board remains conscious of the need
to ensure confidence in the investigations process to maintain
effectiveness. Investigations will continue to be proportional
and focused only on those issues that could potentially- damage
local government if not addressed.
Length of investigation
31. Between 1 April 2002 and 31 July 2004
ethical standards officers conducted 1,465 investigations. During
the same period the Board received 68 written complaints regarding
the conduct of the investigations. A small-scale survey in 2003
indicated that over half of those members investigated were satisfied
with the investigation process.
32. Of all the cases referred to ethical
standards officers by The Standards Board for England over 40%
of investigations are now completed within six months.
33. However, the Board continues to streamline
its case handling processes, recognising the need to balance greater
speed with fairness to all parties. A case weighting system ensures
greater proportionality in handling and resourcing allegations;
an electronic case management system is operated; and additional
investigators have been recruited. The Board aims to complete
90% of cases referred for investigation within six months.
34. The Board has reallocated resource and
aims to clear by 31 March 2005 the 400 oldest cases that built
up when the number of allegations exceeded the initial planned
numbers. Good progress is being made with 25% now cleared and
all others will have been allocated for investigation at the end
of November 2004. This has been helped by additional resources
granted by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, and the use
of external legal firms.
35. New complaints received that the Board
refers for investigation are currently being allocated immediately
to an investigator.
Enforcing the Code of Conduct
36. The Board has challenged and highlighted
behaviour that has the potential to damage confidence in local
democracy by publicising the significant sanctions imposed on
members of local authorities by local standards committees and
the Adjudication Panel for England.
The Adjudication Panel for England
37. The Adjudication Panel for England is
a separate independent judicial tribunal which was established
by Part III, Chapter IV of the Local Government Act 2000 to hear
and adjudicate on matters concerning the conduct of local authority
members. The Adjudication Panel for England also considers appeals
pursuant to Part 3(9) of the The Local Authorities (Code of Conduct)(Local
Determination) Regulations 2003. Ethical standards officers refer
cases to The Adjudication Panel for England when they believe
that a member's misconduct is serious enough to warrant stronger
penalties than the sanctions available to the local standards
committees. The Panel has been hearing cases since 16 January
2003 and has largely confirmed the judgement of the ethical standard
officers by determining that there has been a failure to comply
with the code and imposed sanctions in nearly all cases referred
to it.
Cases heard by Adjudication Panel for England
| No of cases Jan 2003 to Oct 2004
| Cases in which sanctions were imposed
| Cases in which member was disqualified for one year or more
|
| 189 | 182 | 154
|
| |
|
Standards committee determinations
38. Whenever possible the decision to refer cases to
standards committees is based on the principle that the issue
should be dealt with locally with the appropriate sanctions.
39. The first local standards committee hearing took
place on 1 September 2003 and 68 hearings had been held by the
end of August 2004. The delay in introducing regulations meant
that ethical standards officers had to decide to take no further
action in a number of cases because of the lack of available sanctions.
In 91% of cases heard locally in the year to 31 March 2004, the
committee has ruled there has been a breach of the code of conduct.
The Board believes that this is a further confirmation of the
ethical standards officers' judgement. The Board welcomes the
revised sanctions for standards committees introduced in the new
regulations for local investigations.
40. Consideration is also being given to the potential
benefits of conciliation services to resolve local issues. The
Board has hitherto been hampered by the constraints of the Act
in taking advantage of the growing area of dispute resolution.
However, a provision included in the new local investigation regulations
gives ethical standards officers the power to direct the monitoring
officer to deal with a case other than by investigation. Subject
to the resources available locally this may assist in a range
of cases. The Board is seeking actively to identify resources
to promote the availability of alternatives in its corporate plan
currently under development.
Following-up and learning from investigations and tribunal
decisions
41. The Board is introducing processes and procedures
to learn from the investigations, adjudications and determinations.
With a more streamlined investigation process and the ability
to refer allegations for investigation at the local level, the
Board will allocate more time and effort to gathering feedback
and analysing information that identifies a need for guidance
or training in particular areas. The intention will be to identify
and address any trends at an early stage and direct more effort
into informing and supporting the cultural change required to
establish and sustain a robust local ethical framework.
THE STANDARDS
BOARD FOR
ENGLAND'S
RELATIONSHIPS WITH:
(a) other regulatory organisations that support the ethical
framework set out in the Local Government Act 2000;
42. The Board works with other regulatory organisations—including
the Audit Commission, individual police forces, the Commission
for Local Administration in England and the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate—to
support the ethical framework set out in the Local Government
Act 2000. Establishing good, co-operative relationships between
regulators is essential to that framework. Memoranda and protocols
set out the basis for co-operation between the Board and other
regulators to identify areas of overlapping jurisdiction and ensure
that complaints are efficiently dealt with in the way most appropriate
for both the complainant and local authorities.
43. The Board is leading a joint steering committee with
the Audit Commission, the Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA),
the Commission for Local Administration in England and the ODPM,
to help the integration of high ethical standards into the culture
of local government. The steering committee promotes joint working
between the parties, shares expertise and oversees projects that
are likely to result in improved ethical frameworks, underpin
transparent decision-making, and lead to better public services
and greater public confidence in local democracy. Areas of joint
working include:
— input into the new Comprehensive Performance Assessment
(CPA) focusing on how effectively elected members and officers
are working in the ethical framework; and
— ethical aspects of the Corporate Governance Inspection
Methodology for local authorities that receive a weak or poor
rating under the CPA; and the Local Government Diagnostic jointly
badged with the Audit Commission as a risk management tool with
the aim of promoting good practice; and complemented by the Capacity
Building Tool—for principal authorities—jointly developed
by the IDeA to enable local self-assessments of ethical standards,
focusing on conduct and behaviour funded by the ODPM through the
Board.
44. The Board believes that such partnerships are vital
to promote the principles of the code and facilitate a culture
in which good services and good conduct go hand in hand.
45. The Board believes that the ODPM recognises that
the problem the Board is tackling is a continuing issue of public
concern and values the efforts made to establish itself as "a
credible and respected body at the heart of the ethical framework"[3].
The Board's 2004 Annual Assembly was attended by the Right Honourable
Nick Raynsford MP, Minister of State for Local and Regional Government
who endorsed the progress made by the Board and reflected the
Board's excellent relationship with the ODPM.
(c) local government stakeholders.
46. The Board has established positive relationships
with its partners in local government. On a day-to-day basis,
the Board provides guidance on the code of conduct to members,
monitoring officers, parish clerks and the general public. The
Board publishes a monthly bulletin for monitoring officers and
a regular newsletter for standards committees and plans to produce
a newsletter shortly for chief executives and leaders as part
of its commitment to encourage and support the development of
ethical leadership within authorities. The Board believes that
local leadership is essential in embedding the concept of high
standards at the local level. It is looking to engage more closely
with key authority leaders to explore how local government can
move beyond mere compliance with the code of conduct to embed
ethical behaviour as a normative democratic model.
Parish Councils
47. The Board has engaged with parish councils as the
most local level of democratic accountability. As the national
regulatory body with responsibility for standards of conduct in
parish councils, the Board believes that it is in a unique position
to promote ethical standards and temper excesses of behaviour
in some 8,500 parish councils. The Board presently publishes guidance
on the code of conduct, gives presentations and issues a quarterly
parish newsletter to help parish councils to comply with the code.
The Board is also examining with local government representative
bodies and the ODPM ways to build capacity to promote ethical
standards in dysfunctional parish and town councils.
Local Government Groups and Associations
48. The Board has undertaken a series of countrywide
presentations to County Associations of Local Councils and holds
regular round table meetings with the National Association of
Local Councils (NALC). The Board also meets regularly with the
Society of Local Council Clerks (SLCC) and other representatives
of the parish sector, and is currently reviewing its findings
on research undertaken into the Needs of County Associations under
the code of conduct.
49. The Board meets regularly with the Association of
Council Secretaries and Solicitors (ACSeS) and with the Society
of Local Authority Chief Executives (SOLACE), and has held events
at both organisations' annual conferences. The Board has also
spoken at all three major party conferences and has developed
a good working relationship with The Local Government Association.
THE ROLE
OF THE
STANDARDS BOARD
FOR ENGLAND
IN SUPPORTING
THE ESTABLISHMENT
AND OPERATION
OF STANDARDS
COMMITTEES AT
A LOCAL
LEVEL
50. Standards committees must be established by relevant
local authorities under the Act. Regulations came into force in
August 2001 governing the size and membership of these committees
and how they should run their business. They have five statutory
functions:
— to give the authority advice on adopting the local
code of conduct to monitor the effectiveness of the code;
— to train members on the code, or arrange for such
training; and
— to promote and maintain high standards of conduct
for members; and help members to follow the code of conduct.
Independent members
51. Each standards committee must include at least one
independent member from outside the authority and independent
members should constitute at least 25% of the committee membership.
The Board has also encouraged standards committees to be chaired
by an independent member to help reinforce the principle of independent
scrutiny and public trust; encouragingly, the Board has evidence
to show that independent chairs seem to be the norm rather than
the exception. The Board believes it is also important to have
elected members on the standards committee to ensure local government
experience and to embed the committee as an important part of
the structure of the local authority.
52. The Board has encouraged and facilitated the formation
of independent members' regional forums. Eight such forums presently
meet to share experiences and best practice. The Board intends
to assist these forums by providing speakers and advising on development
needs to increase awareness of their role. The Board is particularly
concerned to identify and offer support to those independent members
who may feel isolated within their authority because of the lack
of developed support structures.
The Board's supporting role
53. The Board has actively supported the development
of standards committees through the sharing of best practice and
provision of guidance, encouraging standards committees to take
a more proactive role to augment their statutory functions. Some
standards committees have further defined their role to include
internal and external audit, developing protocols on member-officer
relations and dealing with investigations by the Local Government
Ombudsman.
54. In many cases standards committees have not been
sufficiently active, partly owing to the delay in securing the
regulations for local investigations. As a result, standards of
skills and experience will vary between one committee and another.
In addition, elected members may change and the terms of office
of independent members vary considerably. The Board is seeking
to obtain further quantitative information on these areas, so
that it may develop advice to help committees with the effective
discharge of their duties.
55. A high level of participation in the Board's Annual
Assembly of Standards Committees provides a further opportunity
for networking among standards committees and other members of
the local authority community. Feedback from the 2004 Assembly
indicates that delegates benefited significantly from their contributions
to the workshops and presentations by keynote speakers. Measured
feedback from delegates at the Board's 2004 Assembly showed a
98% overall satisfaction rating with the event.
Local investigations and determinations
56. Standards committees already conduct local determination
hearings on referral from ethical standards officers, and have
received extensive support from the Board to help them prepare
and manage the hearings in a manner conducive to justice, fairness
and the public interest.
57. The capacity of some monitoring officers and standards
committees to take on the significant workload that will accompany
local investigations is a cause for concern. A survey by The University
of Teeside found that 25% of monitoring officers considered themselves
insufficiently resourced or supported to undertake the full extent
of their role under the Act. Local authorities have a duty to
review resources and support to ensure that monitoring officers
can discharge their advisory, training and investigation roles
and give proper support to the standards committees in their work;
failure to achieve this is likely to harm public confidence in
the process of local investigations. The Board will have a pivotal
role in supporting standards committees and monitoring officers
in connection will local investigations under the new regulations.
CONCLUSION
58. The Board believes that the independent scrutiny
of the behaviour of members of local authorities contributes to
public confidence in local democracy. The Board is now at a critical
stage of its development. The code is embedded in local government
and has been shown to be an effective tool for dealing with issues
of conduct. The Board in moving forward needs to ensure that case
handling remains its primary focus; that this is. properly resourced
and that the current streamlining of processes delivers the benefits
expected.
59. The new regulations operative from November 2004
will mean the whole machinery is finally in place. The Board needs
to retain sufficient organisational flexibility to manage future
uncertainties and risks. Caseloads may rise through latent public
demand or new functions (such as licensing) and not all authorities
may be able or resourced to handle the cases which could be allocated
to them. The Board remains committed to supporting local standards
committees and monitoring officers in handling appropriate cases
at the local level, resulting in robust investigations and just
outcomes.
APPENDIX 1
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF GUIDANCE PUBLISHED BY THE STANDARDS BOARD
FOR ENGLAND
1. Guide to Part III of the Local Government Act 2000—May
2002
2. Guidance on Standards Committees—May 2002
3. How do I register and declare interests, and register
gifts and hospitality—May 2003
4. Standards Committee Determinations—July 2003
5. How to make a complaint—November 2003
6. The Case Review Volume One—2003
7. Lobby groups, dual—hatted members and the Code
of Conduct—September 2004
8. The Case Review Number two—2004
9. Local Investigations—Guidance for Monitoring
Officers—November 2004
APPENDIX 2
REFERRAL CRITERIA FOR COMPLAINTS MADE TO THE STANDARDS
BOARD FOR ENGLAND
The Standards Board for England focuses only on allegations
it believes have the potential to damage the public's confidence
in local democracy. People who make a complaint in writing under
the code of conduct are notified of the Board's decision as whether
or not a case is to be referred for investigation.
A matter will be referred for investigation if the Board believes
it meets one of the following criteria:
— it is serious enough, if proven, to justify the
range of sanctions available to The Adjudication Panel for England
or local standards committee; and
— it is part of a continuing pattern of less serious
misconduct which is unreasonably disrupting the business of the
authority and there is no other avenue left to deal with it short
of investigation.
A complaint is unlikely to be referred for investigation
if it falls into any of the following categories:
— it is believed to be malicious, relatively minor,
or tit-for-tat;
— the same, or substantially similar, complaint
has already been the subject of an investigation or inquiry and
there is nothing further to be gained by seeking the sanctions
available to The Adjudication Panel for England or the local standards
committee;
— the complaint concerns acts carried out in the
member's private life which are unlikely to affect his or her
fitness for public office;
— it appears that the grievance is really about
dissatisfaction with a council decision; and
— there is insufficient information currently available
to justify a decision to refer the matter for investigation.
APPEALS AGAINST
THE BOARD'S
DECISION
If a complaint is turned down for investigation the person
who made the complaint can request a review of the decision by
writing to the chief executive of The Standards Board for England
within four weeks of the referral decision.
APPENDIX 3
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2003-04
We measure our performance against a number of key performance
indicators (KPIs). A summary of the results for the year 2003-04
is presented below.
| KPI | Target |
Achieved | Comments
|
| Percentage of correspondence receiving an initial response within five working days of receipt. Includes faxes and e-mails but excludes case related correspondence.
| 90% | 66% | Our practice is to send substantive responses to enquiries, rather than an initial response. An increase in the number and complexity of enquiries has increased turn-around times. Target to be reviewed in the next financial year.
|
| Percentage of telephone enquiries (other than case related enquiries) to receive a substantive response within two working days.
| 90% | 99% |
|
| Percentage of allegations acknowledged within two working days.
| 90% | 59% | Affected by an increasing number of allegations, and by staff turnover. Measurements have been put in place to improve performance in this area.
|
| Percentage of allegations dealt with within 10 working days.
| 90% | 4% | Affected by a number of factors, including inability to delegate decisions from Board until November, embedding of a new case management system and staff turnover. Target to be reviewed in the next financial year.
|
| Percentage of complainants to be contacted by an investigator, either by letter or telephone, within 10 working days of receipt of referral.
| 95% | 50% | Procedural changes and additional future resources will help to improve performance against this target. Target to be reviewed in the next financial year.
|
| Percentage of cases referred for investigation to be completed within four months.
| 40% | 15% | Procedural changes and additional future resources will help to improve performance against this target. 59% of all allegations received by the Board were completed within six months. This and the following KPI only apply to allegations referred for investigation.
|
| Percentage of cases referred for investigation to be completed within six months.
| 90% | 38% | Procedural changes and additional future resources will help to improve performance against this target.
|
| Percentage of invoices paid within terms. |
90% | 94% | |
| Average sickness absence rate. | < 3.5%
| 1.56% | |
| Percentage of staff to be drawn from ethnic minorities.
| 7.2% | 11.9% |
|
| Percentage of councillors rating guidance as satisfactory or above (research project).
| 65% | 40% | Achievement measured by MORI research: Satisfaction with The Standards Board's Support and Guidance to Key Stakeholders (2004). Just 18% of respondents were dissatisfied, 27% neither satisfied or dissatisfied, 14% didn't know and 1% not stated.
|
| Percentage of complainants, and members complained against to be satisfied with the process by which the case was handled (research project).
| 35% | 59% | Figures from in-house telephone survey on a selected sample of completed cases.
|
| | |
|
APPENDIX 4
FINANCIAL RESOURCES AND THE COST OF INVESTIGATIONS (BUDGET
PROJECTIONS 2004-05)
| Cost centre | Budget £000's
| £000's |
| Referrals Unit | 570
| |
| Investigations | 4,604 |
|
| The Adjudication Panel for England | 583
| |
| Policy and Guidance | 927 |
|
| Legal Services | 515 |
|
| Communications | 698 |
|
| Corporate Management | 1,430
| |
| TOTAL | | 9,327
|
| Projections based on budget |
| |
| Allegations received: | 3,800
| |
| Allegations referred: | 1,140
| |
| | |
| Total cost per allegation received: | £2,455
| |
| Referrals Unit cost per allegation received:
| £213 | |
| Investigation cost per referred case: | £5,223
| |
| | |
1
Section 57(4), Part III, Chapter II of the Local Government Act
2000. Back
2
Audit Commission report on Corporate Governance 2003-governance
contributes to the quality of public services. Back
3
Paragraph 23 of the Memorandum by the ODPM to The Tenth Committee
on Standards in Public Life 2004. Back
| 
