Memorandum by the Local Government Association
(LGA) (STA 26)
1. The Local Government Association (LGA)
welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence to the Select Committee's
Inquiry. It represents principal local authorities in England
and Wales, together with fire authorities, passenger transport
authorities, some police authorities and national parks authorities.
It does not represent parish and town councils.
BACKGROUND
2. The present ethical framework for local
government contained in Part III of the Local Government Act 2000,
largely stemmed from recommendations in the Third Report of the
Committee for Standards in Public Life, into issues of probity
in local government. The LGA and its predecessor local authority
Associations had been fully supportive of the work of the Committee
since its establishment in 1994; had argued for a common approach
to matters of probity across the public sector, and had commended
to the Committee long standing elements of local government arrangements,
including the register and declaration of personal interests,
which have since become a feature of public bodies more generally.
3. The LGA had endorsed the approach of
the Committee in its 3rd report probity in local government which
proposed:
— The adoption of the seven Principles
of Public Life in local government (subsequently appearing as
10 Principles of Good Conduct in the Local Government Act 2000).
— The adoption of local codes for local
government.
— Internal systems for investigation
and adjudication of probity issues; supported by independent scrutiny
of decisions.
4. It also supported much of the present
ethical framework in local government as introduced by the 2000
Act, including local codes; local standards committees; and the
establishment of the Standards Board for England, which stemmed
directly from the Committee's recommendations.
THE OPERATION
OF THE
ETHICAL FRAMEWORK
IN LOCAL
GOVERNMENT
5. Before responding to the specific issues
about the performance of the Standards Board for England (SBE)
raised by the Select Committee, the LGA would wish to comment
on its continuing concerns on the statutory framework in the Local
Government Act 2000 within which the Board and local authorities
have to operate.
6. The LGA is concerned that the ethical
structures in place in local government should be proportionate
to the risk of unethical behaviour. In considering the issue of
proportionality, it is worth recalling Lord Nolan's introduction
to the Committee's 3rd report, in which he said "Despite
instances of corruption and misbehaviour, the vast majority of
councillors and officers observe high standards of conduct".
That is our starting point, and we do not believe that the experience
over the last three years of the operation of the Standards Board
in investigating and adjudicating on complaints against principal
authority councillors in any way undermines that judgment.
7. It is understood that SBE has received
over 4,000 complaints since its inception, less than half of which
were proceeded with. About 180 cases were considered serious enough
to be referred to the Adjudication Panel. These numbers are to
be regretted but it needs to be acknowledged that only a very
small proportion of these cases related to members from principal
local authorities.
8. These figures illustrate a central issue
for the LGA in relation to the operation of the ethical framework:
Is the system for the investigation and adjudication of complaints
against councillors too centralised?
9. The LGA has supported the creation of
a national body to adjudicate on the most serious cases of misconduct,
and to provide guidance on ethical behaviour. However, it was
our view that such a body would best operate within a system which
provided the opportunity for the local authority to resolve complaints
at local level, either informally, or with the involvement of
its local standards committee, before any involvement by the national
body. Local codes need to be locally owned, and responsibility
for encouraging appropriate behaviour best sits with the body
itself, and its members.
10. The model of local resolution for most
cases, with national involvement only for the minority of most
serious cases was argued strongly by the LGA and figured in the
model which it produced for Government. This model reflects the
approach taken by the Commission for Local Administration in handling
complaints, where attempts must be made to resolve matters locally
before national involvement.
11. However, the statutory framework introduced
by the 2000 Act takes the opposite approach—all complaints
must be referred in the first instance to the Standards Board,
and only after investigation can less serious cases be referred
back to the local Standards Committee for adjudication.
12. This centralised approach has had several
adverse affects in the first years of the Board's operation:
— There is no opportunity for initial
resolution of complaints at local level, and therefore the number
of complaints made to the Board was far higher than necessary.
This in turn has led to delays in dealing with complaints—or
indeed deciding that there is no case to answer. The LGA had argued
that the process of investigation and adjudication of complaints
needed to be as swift as possible, for the sake of all parties
concerned. The delays being experienced through the system which
the Board is required to operate are widely seen as unacceptable
by councillors, particularly when over half of complaints are
not proceeded with by the Board.
— Delays have been exacerbated by the
delays of Government in implementing regulations which would permit
the Board to refer less serious cases back down to local standards
committees for investigation and adjudication. Four years after
the passage of the Act, the final regulations permitting SBE to
refer matters to authorities for local investigation have only
recently been put in place.
— The role of local standards committees
has not had the opportunity to develop. The centralised approach
has meant that they are unable to act as initial arbiters of complaints—they
are seen as very much poor relations to the Board, and only very
recently, because of delays in the secondary legislation, have
they been able to participate in the adjudication and investigation
of complaints.
13. The delays in secondary legislation
have put much strain on the Board in its early years in handling
complaints. The introduction of the last regulatory provisions
will now help their operation, and we know that the Board is making
much progress in dealing with its backlog of cases. Nevertheless,
we remain of the view that the statutory requirement that all
complaints have to be referred to the Board for initial consideration
should be reviewed.
A PREFERRED APPROACH
14. The LGA would wish to see an approach
which provides:
— Greater ownership of the ethical
health of a local authority by the local authority.
— A quicker resolution of most cases
through local informal means before formal complaint.
— A real role for local standards committees.
And for the Board:
— A greater emphasis on guidance, rather
than investigation of all cases.
— A greater concentration on serious
allegations.
— A greater role as the regulator of
the process at local level.
15. The LGA has the following comments in
relation to the specific issues raised by the Select Committee.
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 MEMBERS
OF LOCAL
AUTHORITIES
16. In the view of the LGA, the Board has
taken extremely seriously its statutory role of promoting the
ethical health of local authorities through guidance on the implications
for councillors of the provisions of the model code of conduct,
as translated into each authority's local code. It has published
guidance on both the generality of the code's provisions and specific
aspects, such as the declaration of interests, and appropriate
conduct when serving on more than one body. Our impression is
that such guidance has been well-received.
17. Its web-site is a useful tool for advice
through its frequently asked questions section and its bulletin
of cases. In its first years, Board staff undertook many presentations
across the country to both councillors and officers on the provisions
of the code. Much of this effort was directed at parish and town
councillors, for whom the Act's ethical provisions were a new
personal responsibility.
18. The provision of guidance to encourage
and support local authorities in maintaining and enhancing the
probity of local government is a significant aspect of the Board's
statutory responsibilities. The requirement of the statutory framework
that all complaints must be handled initially at Board level,
coupled with the delay in implementing the secondary legislation,
has meant that much of the Board's resources have been put towards
its investigatory responsibilities. It is to its credit that it
has been able to maintain its guidance role during this period.
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
19. The inability of the Board in its first
years to refer complaints back to local level for investigation
and adjudication has inevitably caused delays in concluding investigations.
Whilst the Association believes that the Board has sought to ensure
that its processes for investigating complaints are fair to all
parties to a complaint, the delays in reaching conclusions have
caused much concern within the wider local government community
and for the individual councillors concerned.
20. The LGA has no reason to question the
outcomes of the small minority of serious cases which reach adjudication
by the Adjudication Panel, it remains concerned at the other end
of the scale—the high proportion of less serious complaints
which are referred to the Board, but which are not referred on
to Ethical Standards Officers for further investigation. According
to the Board's evidence, only around 27% of complaints were referred
on in the current year.
21. The LGA welcomes the fact that the Board
has begun to develop criteria for deciding whether cases ought
to be referred for further investigation, particularly to discourage
trivial, malicious, or politically inspired tit for tat complaints.
But such cases still take up the time of the Board's staff, adding
to its workload, and could be better dealt with initially by the
local authority itself. But the statutory framework does not allow
it, although the secondary legislation will now permit a reference
back to the local authority's standards committee in such less
serious cases.
22. Whilst the statutory framework requires
the Board to consider all allegations received relating to members'
conduct, the LGA welcomes the consideration which the Board is
giving to the potential benefits of conciliation services to resolve
local disputes. Powers in the latest regulations permitting cases
to be referred to local authority monitoring officers for investigation,
also include a provision to enable an Ethical Standards Officer
to direct the monitoring officer of a local authority to deal
with a case other than by investigation. This provision appears
to be a step towards local resolution of complaints (but still,
of course, will have involved the case going to the national level
first.)
23. The Model Code of Conduct, upon which
all the local authority codes are based, is the starting point
for the framework of ethical conduct for councillors. Many of
the requirements of the Model Code of Conduct, reflected in local
codes, are a re-statement of long-standing, and well-understood
requirements in local government. The core issues of the separation
of public from private interests through the need to register
and declare interests are essential and continue to be supported.
It is part of the fabric of local government life. In most respects,
therefore, the code is uncontroversial, and its implications are
well-clarified by the Board's guidance.
24. The Government has asked the Board to
undertake a review of the Code's provisions in the New Year and
the LGA will hope to work closely with it to identify and make
recommendations to improve any areas which may lack clarity or
which, may, with experience of operating the code, no longer be
appropriate.
THE STANDARDS
BOARD FOR
ENGLAND'S
RELATIONSHIPS WITH
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
STAKEHOLDERS
25. The LGA has regular and constructive
meetings both at member and officer level with the Board and its
staff. The LGA is regularly consulted by the Board on its guidance
notes, and, as mentioned above, will anticipate working with the
Board on the review of the Model Code of Conduct.
THE ROLE
OF THE
STANDARDS BOARD
FOR ENGLAND
IN SUPPORTING
THE ESTABLISHMENT
AND OPERATION
OF STANDARDS
COMMITTEES AT
LOCAL LEVEL
26. Under the Local Government Act 2000,
relevant local authorities were required to establish local standards
committees. The LGA understands that the Board has supported the
formation of independent members' regional forums, where the independent
members of standards committees are able to share good practice.
The Board has also organised three Annual Assemblies of Standards
Committees, in which the LGA has participated.
27. The Board provided advice and guidance
on the conduct of hearings when local committees were first able
to adjudicate on cases referred to them by the Board.
| 
