Examination of Witnesses (Questions 200-210)
17 JANUARY 2005
SIR ANTHONY
HOLLAND, MR
DAVID PRINCE
AND MR
PAUL HOEY
Q200 Mr O'Brien: Can I refer to local
standards committees, Sir Anthony. At the last session it was
said, and most of the evidence we have been given has been that
the local standards committee should deal with all complaints
and then forward the most serious ones to the Standards Board.
Is this a practical operation?
Sir Anthony Holland: It is practical
because when you are setting up the regulatory system you could
start from the top or from the bottom. I have read, like you have—and
you have heard it—the evidence of Dennis Wilson from the
Northamptonshire standards committee, who felt that if you start
from the bottom up, there might well be problems. Equally, if
you start from the top there are problems. When you are setting
up a new scheme—because, believe you me this was a very
new idea and it was not taken kindly to by the local councillors
concerned, as I know—it is probably better to start from
the top. That is not to say that you do that for ever and a day.
I personally think that you are better off keeping it top down
for the time being. It would be putting an enormous burden on
some standards committees locally. It would also take away such
confidence as there is that what is being done is being done objectively
if it was done locally at this stage.
Sir Anthony Holland: After all,
the great purpose of what we are about is to create a view that
if there is a genuine problem with a local authority or councillors
or whatever, it does get looked at objectively by people who are
fairly objective in the way they are looking at things. Clearly,
if you have a local committee there is a chance that it will not
be, and the way to safeguard against that is to say "Right,
every member of a local standards committee must be independently
appointed by an external body" and that way you can guard
against that problem, but I still think at the beginning of an
exercise like this, and we have only been doing it for two and
a half years in terms of complaints, if you start looking at it
too quickly after the beginning I think you are in danger of getting
it wrong. You have to build up experience, understanding and confidence
in the system, and if you change it too quickly after you have
started then one of the effects is to destroy that confidence.
One other point: local standards committees are variable, and
are bound to be because some have independent chairmen, some do
not, how they are made up varies, and whereas there are some which
are perfectly independent and very objective, others are not quite
within that category.
Q201 Sir Paul Beresford: Because of the
variation that you outline of the different committees and the
fact that one of the aims of the code of conduct is to see that
public trust in elected members is maintained and increased, if
the complaints board is looking at their own standards will this
develop that conduct or trust in members by the public, or do
you think we should be doing something positive on the point you
raised about independent chairmen, or independent members?
Sir Anthony Holland: I think the
more independence the local committee has the greater the confidence
in what its outcome will be.
Q202 Sir Paul Beresford: How do you get
that down to local authorities?
Sir Anthony Holland: Every year
we have the assembly of all the standards committees, where the
chairmen come along and the monitoring officers come, and we try
to emphasise, and we have done it on each of the three occasions,
the importance of having independent chairmen and, even more importantly,
independent members as well.
Q203 Andrew Bennett: You have this whole
process of investigation. Do you think the sanctions against individual
councillors at the end are reasonable and sensible?
Sir Anthony Holland: On balance
I think they probably are, yes.
Q204 Andrew Bennett: And you do not think
there is a danger that you penalise the electorate rather than
the council?
Sir Anthony Holland: That is always
a danger and, again, it is a balancing exercise of which is the
more important objective. Parliament has decided, and I think
that is right, that this is the more important objective, to get
the councillor's behaviour, if you like, totally above board,
objectively considered, and dealt with.
Q205 Andrew Bennett: I am aware of a
councillor who has been suspended for six months from all his
council activities because he hit one of his constituents. He
was elected relatively recently; most of the people who voted
for him would know of his fiery nature. Is it really fair on his
constituents that for six months he will not be able to pursue
matters and do representation?
Sir Anthony Holland: I suppose
that is the price you have to pay for this kind of legislation.
Q206 Andrew Bennett: Do you think it
is good legislation?
Sir Anthony Holland: Life is not
very fair and occasionally, when you have any legislation, there
are drawbacks to parts of it and it may not be perfect. If I had
to stand back and make an assessment of this particular piece
of legislation's intent I think it is a good piece of legislation.
I started out having no experience; I have made no bones about
this of local government; I was appalled by some of the things
I saw in the first 15 months or 18 months when we looked at every
complaint. I had no idea such things went on. It has not actually
destroyed my faith in local government because I think by and
large the vast majority, 98% of people, do a very good job often
with great difficulty and at great demand and personal sacrifice
to their families.
Q207 Andrew Bennett: So do you think
after two and a half years you have improved the standards in
local government?
Sir Anthony Holland: I could not
make a judgment; that is for others to judge.
Q208 Mr Sanders: For the record, what
is the annual budget?
Sir Anthony Holland: £8.9
million.
Q209 Chairman: I think the last statement
but one was very positive so I was going to say it is a very good
note on which to end, but do you want to risk spoiling that, Mr
Prince?
Mr Prince: Just going back to
an earlier question, the Board handles about 1,000 cases in the
course of a year in terms of referred cases.
Q210 Chairman: Is that the value for
money question?
Mr Prince: Yes. A thousand cases
are considered in terms of one of the statutory sanctions.
Mr Sanders: But if they were not there
they would not be considered, would they, and therefore the money
would not be spent.
Chairman: On which note I think it is
a good time to thank you for your evidence.
| 
