Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120-128)
6 DECEMBER 2004
SIR JEREMY
BEECHAM, MS
CHLOE LAMBERT
AND MR
ROY WILLIAMS
Q120 Andrew Bennett: Is there any evidence
that it is discouraging people coming forward to go on to councils?
Do they think it is bureaucratic and difficult to cope with?
Sir Jeremy Beecham: I am not aware
of that in principal councils. There was a suggestion, and I do
not know whether it still holds, from parish councils that it
would deter people, and it is alleged that it has led to a number
of people resigning from parish councils in the early days. I
do not know whether that remains the case.
Ms Lambert: In my experience people
are more put off by completing the register of interests than
by the code itself.
Q121 Mr Betts: There has been criticism
of the Standards Board that it takes far too much time looking
at its own procedures, spending money on glossy brochures, and
promoting various aspects of its work, rather than dealing with
the complaints that were being sent to it. Was that fair criticism?
Sir Jeremy Beecham: I do not think
it is entirely fair because they had a problem with inadequate
numbers of staff to begin with, and, as it later turns out, difficulty
procuring the necessary regulations to cover part of their work.
In any case, it is probably important for them to establish a
profile, as it were, in setting up shop. In any event, I think
that that is in the past and we are now certainly seeking to concentrate
on turning round cases quickly. It is a fair point, as Mr Williams
said, that they should be looking as closely at guidance and training
and preventative aspects of their work as well as dealing with
cases, and hopefully the caseload will drop as matters are referred
to the Standards Board.
Q122 Mr Betts: Is it your experience
that things are getting better? Last year it was pretty awful,
was it not? One of the key figures I saw was that their target
was to deal with 90% of their serious investigations in six months,
and in fact over half of them, were taking over six months.
Sir Jeremy Beecham: It is worse
than the average planning authority.
Ms Lambert: It is unacceptable,
but it is getting better.
Q123 Chairman: Previous witnesses have
given their views on the role that the local standards committees
are taking in filtering through the Standards Board, which is
slightly different from the way in which things are operating
at the moment. Do you think that would be any better, or are there
risks in that?
Ms Lambert: I think it would be
helpful, but I think it is more that the complaints need to start
off at local level, rather than go to the Standards Board and
then come back local authorities. They need to start off, because
so many of these, particularly where they are vexatious or political,
could be eliminated before the need to go to the Standards Board,
if they were dealt with—
Q124 Chairman: Is that not equally the
worry that some of the valid ones might be eliminated before they
got to the Standards Board?
Ms Lambert: It would not be a
worry that I would have.
Q125 Andrew Bennett: A good city boss
in the past would have sorted them out.
Sir Jeremy Beecham: One tries!
Q126 Chairman: In terms of the guidance
on the code, there had been a worry in the past about people that
had been appointed by councils to outside bodies not being allowed
to speak on matters concerning those bodies. Has that been resolved
in more recent times?
Sir Jeremy Beecham: I am not sure
it has. I have a current case in my own authority, where there
is an issue around a city academy. A member is appointed by the
authority to chair a governing body of an existing school, and
she has been advised that she has a prejudicial interest and should
not even attend a scrutiny committee, let alone an executive committee.
This is an area where there does need to be clear and more robust
guidance.
Q127 Chairman: Is that local advice?
Ms Lambert: Yes, and lawyers—as
I am declaring my interest—are inclined to be somewhat over
cautious.
Q128 Chairman: That is the concern that
has been expressed, and I thought the Standards Board had said
they had tried to resolve it, but it is a question we can put
to them.
Ms Lambert: Further guidance needs
to be given, particularly to those who are asked to be a trustee
of an outside body. We are always advised on my authority not
to be a trustee because of the legal implications of it, but I
know that other authorities do not receive the same advice.
Chairman: Thank you very much for your
evidence.
| 
