Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: To note the report.
RESOLVED: To note the report.
RESOLVED: To note the report.
RESOLVED: 1. To delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Chair to finalise the revised draft Whistleblowing, having regard to the comments made by the Committee, and recommend it to Cabinet for approval; and To provide any comments on the proposed arrangements for communication and training in relation to the revised Policy, once approved.
RESOLVED: To note the report.
RESOLVED: To note the report.
RESOLVED: To note the report.
RESOLVED: To note the update.
RESOLVED: To approve the Work Programme at Appendix A
Apologies were received from Chrissie Nicholls and Cllr Cunnah. The Chair welcomed members to the meeting and advised them that he intended to limit the amount of time each member had to speak on an item to 5 minutes, apart from members of officers presenting reports. Cllr Brown-Reckless expressed concern this was a new procedure that had been introduced for this meeting to try and restrict her from speaking. The Chair advised that it was within his discretion, and that there was limited time available. Cllr Brown-Reckless requested that members be provided with verbatim of this section of the meeting together with items 5 and 12. The Chair did not accede to the request.
No declarations of interest were received.
The Chair welcomed Louise Evans as a new Independent Member of the Committee, noting that the Council approved the appointment at its meeting on 26 September 2024.
The minutes of the meeting on 16 July 2024 were approved as a correct record, subject to the following amendments: Minute 4: To delete the words: (, that full transcript is attached to these minutes as Appendix A) To add the following paragraph prior to the resolution: Members debated the establishment of a Working Group, Cllr Brown-Reckless objected to its establishment. Minute 7: To add the following paragraph prior to the resolution: Cllr Brown-Reckless advised that any previous Conservative agreement to the submission of a Group Leaders Report was withdrawn. Minute 8: To add the following paragraph prior to the resolution: Cllr Brown-Reckless objected to the practice of Independent Members of the Standards & Ethics Committee observing meetings; that those Independent Members could be conflicted as they were remunerating for attending those meetings; and that any previous Conservative agreement to the practice was retracted. Minute 10: To delete the words: (, that full transcript is attached to these minutes as Appendix B) The Monitoring Officer advised that she was satisfied that the minutes were fit for purpose. Cllr Brown-Reckless requested a recorded vote to approve the minutes, subject to the amendments referred to. A roll call vote was taken. For: Independent Members Jason Bartlett, Louise Evans, David Mills and Rashpal Singh, Councillor Imran Latif and Community Councillor Julia Charles. Against: Councillor Catriona Brown-Reckless. There were no abstentions. The vote was carried.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the report.
The Chair introduced the item, which was to allow the Committee to consider the report which was published on 27 September 2024 and to note its content. The Chair invited the Monitoring Officer to introduce the report. The Monitoring Officer directed members to the recommendations and conclusions of Dr Melissa McCullough who undertook the review; the letter from the Ombudsman accepting the recommendations; and the press release from the Ombudsman’s office. Members were invited to ask questions and make comments. Cllr Brown-Reckless requested that the Monitoring Officer give the Committee the background to the report. The Monitoring Officer referred members to paragraph 2 of her report setting out the background, and Appendix A, the report of the independent review. Cllr Brown-Reckless objected to recommendation that the Committee note the report. The Monitoring Officer advised that the report has been brought to the Committee’s attention for noting but had been prepared by Dr Melissa McCullough and it would not be appropriate for the Committee to go behind the report which is a substantial one setting out the incident leading up to the review. The report is in the public domain and it is not for the Committee to express concerns about how the matter was handled. Any individual concerns with the investigation could be taken up directly with Dr McCullough. RESOLVED: To note the report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the report.
The Chair introduced the report, which was to provide the Committee with an update in respect of the Quarter 2 Code of Conduct Complaints. The recommendation was to note the report. The Chair invited the Monitoring Officer to present the report. The Monitoring Officer drew members’ attention to a typographical error on p.83 in which 2 complaints against community councillors had been wrongly inputted into the members column. The Monitoring Officer advised members that the Ombudsman had decided not to investigate the first complaint on the grounds that it was not the purpose of the Code of Conduct to inhibit free speech and the robust expression of political differences; commenting that the this sort of behaviour in a Council meeting is regarded as being a matter for the Chair of that meeting to address. Regarding the second complaint involving a Community Councillor; the Ombudsman, when deciding not to investigate, commented that the Code should not be used to by members to pursue political or private differences or make complaints which have little substance or are frivolous. The Monitoring Officer advised members that issues raised with her on an informal basis are not documented; they are documented if escalated to a formal complain. RESOLVED: To note the report.
Part of an issue followed across 2 meetings
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the report.
The Chair introduced the report, which was to provide the Committee with information to enable it to oversee and monitor the Council’s whistleblowing procedures and to consider any ethical issues arising. Members were reminded that Appendix A was confidential, and that if there was to be discussion about the Appendix the Committee would have to move into closed session. The Chair invited the Monitoring Officer to present the report. The Monitoring Officer advised members that there had been 9 complaints, although 4 were effectively the same and came from an anonymous source, so it was not possible to determine whether they were from separate individuals. None of the complaints was upheld. The Monitoring Officer expressed pleasure at the way in which matters had been expedited and the support she had received from the Senior Management Team. RESOLVED: To note the report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: 1. To delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Chair to finalise the revised draft Whistleblowing, having regard to the comments made by the Committee, and recommend it to Cabinet for approval; and To provide any comments on the proposed arrangements for communication and training in relation to the revised Policy, once approved.
The Chair introduced the report, which was to allow the Committee to consider the policy and the proposed amendments requested. The Chair invited the Monitoring Officer to present the report. The Monitoring Officer advised members that the policy was last reviewed in 2014 and her aim was to achieve a strengthening of it. She had discussed it at Senior Management Team and presented the draft report to the Trade Union Partnership Forum, following which she had received comments from the Unison chair which have been tabled and are set out as a supplemental item. The Monitoring Officer summarised the comments from the Unison chair regarding the grey area between grievance and whistleblowing matters, and advised that the report makes it clear that there should not be confusion between the policies. Staff and unions are invited to contact the Monitoring Officer should any clarification be required. Members were informed that the Monitoring Officer accepted the Unison chair’s advice that paragraph 8.2 could be simplified to encourage people to use the policy and the whistleblowing form. The Monitoring Officer advised that it was a matter for the Committee as to whether or not trade union representatives should be added as an external point of contact. Members were invited to ask questions or make comments. Members expressed support for the wording of paragraph 2.6 regarding the ability to dispute the outcome of proceedings under the resolution or disciplinary policy; they agreed with the rewording of paragraph 8.2; and expressed the view that it would be helpful to add the recognised trade unions as external points of contact. Cllr Brown-Reckless sought clarification on whether the whistleblowing policy applied to Councillors, and was advised it did not. Cllr Brown-Reckless asked whether, if a member of staff overheard or saw something which suggested there might be wrongdoing, the Monitoring Officer would want the member of staff to report it to her or to their line manager. The Monitoring Officer confirmed that she would encourage people to contact her directly if they have concerns; depending on the circumstances she might redirect them. Cllr Brown-Reckless expressed the view that it was important for members of staff to be able to whistle blow on matters at a low level as they might not necessarily have all the information, but they would be able to bring it to the attention of the Monitoring Officer who would be able to investigate or might have other information from other sources. Cllr Brown-Reckless referred to paragraph 8.5, commenting that members of staff should be able to whistle blow without having to demonstrate reasonable grounds; they might be bringing low-level information to the Monitoring Officer’s attention. The Monitoring Officer advised that the wording aligns with the 1998 Act; an individual cannot come forward with a whistleblowing notification without any justification. It could be somebody would approach their manager or the Monitoring Officer through the policy and there would be an opportunity to assess whether there was sufficient information to warrant it going forward as a whistleblowing notification. Members expressed the view that it was important for officers to have verbal forms of notification as some might have difficulties using a written form. Members suggested that unions be put on the internal contact list as it might be that individuals within the union were part of the whistle-blowing complaint. The Monitoring Officer advised members that report would be going to scrutiny committee in November and then to Cabinet, and it would be useful to agree the Committee’s comments and incorporate them in the draft. Cllr Brown-Reckless suggested that the form be amended to make clear that individuals do not need to fill in every part of the form, and where it asks whether an individual is reporting a criminal offence, breach of legal obligation, etc, these options be prefaced with the word ‘possible’. Cllr Brown-Reckless raised concern that there was a conflict in the policy between officers being prohibited from bringing vexatious, malicious or frivolous complaints on the one hand, and required to whistle blow if they have information about wrongdoing on the other. This raises the possibility that should a complaint not be proven, the whistleblower could be held to have brought a vexatious or malicious complaint. People may pass on suspicions or concerns that do not necessarily stand up for investigation. She suggested that the wording in 6 be altered from ‘make an untrue allegation’ to ‘make an allegation which you know not to be true’. She suggested that if someone had information which they did not know amounted to a serious matter and passed it on to the Monitoring Officer, that would not be malicious but them saying that they did not have the whole story as they were only an employee and only had one piece of the jigsaw. RESOLVED: 1. To delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Chair to finalise the revised draft Whistleblowing, having regard to the comments made by the Committee, and recommend it to Cabinet for approval; and To provide any comments on the proposed arrangements for communication and training in relation to the revised Policy, once approved.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the report.
The Chair introduced the report, which was to enable the Committee to consider the arrangements in respect of dispensation applications, and in particular the policy and the application form. He advised that the Committee had been asked to comment on those items and consider ways it can be highlighted with members. The Chair invited the Monitoring Officer to present the report. The Monitoring Officer advised the Committee that there is an opportunity, where members have a personal and prejudicial interest, to apply for a dispensation in certain circumstances, and that there are various grounds on which committee can consider granting a dispensation either to speak or to speak and vote. The Monitoring Officer advised that the policy appeared to be little used and that it could be brought to wider attention. RESOLVED: To note the report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the report.
The Chair introduced the report, which was to review the personal interest declarations made by Senior Officers of the Council. The Monitoring Officer having declared a prejudicial interest, left the meeting. The Chair invited the Deputy Monitoring Officer Leanne Weston to present the report. The Chair reminded members that Appendix B attached to the report was confidential, and that if members wished to discuss the specifics of the declarations the Committee would have to move into closed session. The Deputy Monitoring Officer presented a brief outline of the report, which sets out the background and requirement for senior officers to declare personal interests and secondary employment. She advised members that the policy is Council-led and pointed to the current requirements in terms of how personal interests are declared and what is proposed for the future in accordance with the Council’s digitalisation of processes. The new system will apply to all Council officers but will be tested in Governance and Legal Services initially. The report indicates that it will be necessary to make minor amendments to the policy and the Monitoring Officer’s delegated authority. The personal information of Senior Officers will not be disclosed in accordance with GDPR. RESOLVED: To note the report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the report.
The Chair introduced the report, which was to consider the feedback provided by Committee members of the observation of meetings of the Council and community councils. The Chair invited the Monitoring Officer to present the report. The Monitoring Officer referred to observations at St Fagan’s Community Council and the Public Protection Subcommittee, and asked members to continue to observe meetings, liaising with officers to ensure an appropriate spread of attendance at various meetings. Members were invited to ask questions and make comments. Cllr Brown-Reckless reiterated her concerns about the process of observing meetings of Council and Community Councils, adding that she believed it would inhibit members from speaking out and that it was not established practice as had been suggested. The Chair stated that the meetings have proved very successful. They need to take place once a year and he did not concur that they would in any way be intimidating. The Monitoring Officer advised that she had met with the 6 community council clerks the previous week, and they had said unanimously that they had found the observations of meetings very helpful and did not feel there was over-attendance at community councils. They expressed themselves happy with the pro-forma and supported the attendance of independent members. She added that her understanding was that the practice had been in place for 4-5 years. Members stated that while they understood the concerns of Cllr Brown-Reckless, their experience had been that when they attended community council meetings to observe they had been welcomed, and there had been a real desire to discuss and learn what differences they could make. Radyr Community Council had a new clerk who welcomed the support. If independent members doing observations are supportive that concern will be alleviated. Members stated that for them the focus in doing observations was growth and development, and they had been welcomed. Observations were useful for giving guidance and sharing best practice. Members observed that the Committee has a statutory responsibility for ensuring that elected members of Cardiff Council and the 6 community councils within Cardiff observe high standards of conduct befitting of their public office and in line with the principles enshrined in the Statutory Members Code of Conduct. Observation of meetings allow members to ensure that there are high standards; issues members observe are fed back in a supportive manner and help community councils develop, and are welcomed by clerks. Cllr Brown-Reckless expressed concern that she believed that Councillors felt that Code of Conduct complaints would be made as a result of what was said by them at meetings. Members expressed the view that it was very important for the Committee to be proactive not reactive; not just to be in receipt of things but members going out and seeing for themselves that things are working in action; and to have different members there so there is a mix of people which will alleviate concerns about someone behaving in an overbearing way. Feedback forms enable members to look at best practice. Members clarified that while community councillors might be volunteers not full-time councillors, they take pride in what they do in their community council and try to do it in the most professional manner possible. Community councils they have visited and liaised with are always looking for ways to better and improve their standards. The Monitoring Officer expressed discomfort about the way the word volunteers had been used in regard to community councillors, who are either elected or co-opted and are community councillors in their own right. Cllr Brown-Reckless expressed disagreement with the point raised earlier about Committee members being proactive not reactive; she felt it went to the heart of the difference constitutionally between elected representatives and paid officers. The Monitoring Officer reminded members to address themselves to the chair rather than to individual members. At the request of Councillor Brown-Reckless there was a recorded vote. For: Independent Members Jason Bartlett, Louise Evans, David Mills and Rashpal Singh, Councillor Imran Latif and Community Councillor Julia Charles. Against: Councillor Catriona Brown-Reckless. There were no abstentions. The vote was carried. RESOLVED: To note the report.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To note the update.
The Chair introduced the report which was to update the Committee on the work undertaken by the Working Group to date. The Chair invited David Mills, Chair of the Working Group to present the report. Mr Mills gave a brief outline of the Working Group’s meetings to date. Its second meeting on 10 October 2024 was to consider the redacted Conservative Group correspondence. At the meeting, the Working Group was only able to consider half the material due to the level of discussion required. Consequently, the Working Group will reconvene at a date to be confirmed, as there are those who cannot attend the previously agreed date of 7th November. An interim report will be prepared, to be considered this by the Standards and Ethics Committee and, if approved, provide Group Leaders with a copy of the correspondence and the interim report. After consideration of their representations a final report will be issued setting out the Working Group’s recommendations for discussion and approval at a subsequent meeting of the Committee. Following a request from Cllr Brown-Reckless the Chair agreed that the Conservative Group correspondence could be shared with Louise Evans as a new member of the Committee, although she would not be involved in the Working Group. RESOLVED: To note the update.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: To approve the Work Programme at Appendix A
The Chair invited the Monitoring Officer to introduce the report. The Monitoring Officer presented the report, and advised members that when the Committee considers report they wish to see come up at future meetings, she would wish to ensure that sufficient time was available to consider topical issues arising. Cllr Brown-Reckless commented that she would like the committee to consider her concerns about the standards regime. The Monitoring Officer stated that her recollection was that there was a debate at the previous meeting but the Committee did not decide to put it on the agenda. Members can put forward comments, recommendations and motions, but unless they are voted for and agreed by the Committee they do not form part of the Forward Work Programme. At the request of Councillor Brown-Reckless there was a recorded vote. For: Independent Members Jason Bartlett, Louise Evans, David Mills and Rashpal Singh and Community Councillor Julia Charles. Against: Councillor Catriona Brown-Reckless and Councillor Imran Latif. There were no abstentions. The vote was carried. RESOLVED: To approve the Work Programme at Appendix A
None were received.
The next meeting will be held on Wednesday 22nd of January 2025 at 5pm.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.