LONDON BOROUGH OF TOWER HAMLETS ARRANGEMENTS FOR DEALING WITH COMPLAINTS OF BREACH OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT FOR MEMBERS
Arrangements agreed by Council on 5th December 2016.
Introduction
The Council has adopted a Code of Conduct for Members which is available on the Council’s website and on request from the Monitoring Officer.
In accordance with section 28 of the Localism Act 2011, these arrangements set out how an allegation may be made that the Mayor, an elected Member or a Co-opted Member of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets has failed to comply with the Council’s Code of Conduct for Members and how the Council will deal with such allegations.
These arrangements also require that the Monitoring Officer shall ensure that the Council appoints at least one Independent Person and at least one reserve Independent Person for the purposes of meeting the statutory requirements of the Localism Act 2011.
Any reference in these arrangements to the Monitoring Officer shall include a deputy Monitoring Officer. The timelines set out are for guidance and shall be observed where practicable but may be extended by the Monitoring Officer as necessary if they cannot be complied with by any relevant party due to sickness, holidays or other reasonable cause.
Complaints
1. Allegations concerning possible breaches of the Code of Conduct for Members should be made in writing to the Monitoring Officer.
2. On receipt of a complaint the Monitoring Officer shall within five working days acknowledge receipt to the complainant. The Monitoring Officer will also within five working days and on a confidential basis, inform the subject Member of the substance of the complaint and the identity of the complainant (unless the Monitoring Officer considers that such notification would prejudice the proper consideration and investigation of the complaint).
3. Complainants must provide their name and postal address when submitting a complaint. Anonymous complaints will not be considered unless the Monitoring Officer decides (after consultation with the Independent Person) that the complaint raises a serious issue affecting the public interest which is capable of investigation without the need to ascertain the complainant's identity.
4. A complainant when making an allegation should specify the identity of the person(s) alleged to have breached the Code, the conduct that is alleged to give rise to the breach, the evidence that supports the allegation and the names (and contact details) for any potential witnesses able to give direct evidence of the events complained about.
Assessment of Complaints
5. The Monitoring Officer shall, after consultation with the Independent Person and within ten working days of receiving the complaint:
a) Decide whether or not a complaint merits formal investigation and where appropriate arrange for an investigation; OR
b) Decide to attempt to facilitate informal resolution of the complaint (such attempt shall be subject to a four-week time limit).
6. In making this determination the Monitoring Officer may at their discretion report the matter to the Investigation & Disciplinary Sub-Committee (IDSC) of the Standards Advisory Committee for consideration and/or consult other persons as appropriate.
7. The Monitoring Officer may decide not to refer the matter for investigation where:
(a) The allegation does not demonstrate any potential breach of the Code (because for example it relates to dissatisfaction with a Council decision/service or relates to events which occurred when the person complained about was not acting in an official capacity).
(b) The event(s) complained about took place more than six months ago and there are no valid reasons for the delay in bringing the complaint, such as fresh evidence not available at the earlier date or only recently discovered.
(c) The allegation is about someone who is no longer the Mayor or a Member/Co-opted Member.
(d) The complainant failed to provide the information specified in paragraph 4 above or any other information reasonably requested by the Monitoring Officer.
(e) The same or a similar allegation has been investigated and determined.
(f) The Mayor, Member or Co-opted Member has already accepted they made an error in their conduct and/or has apologised for their conduct and the Monitoring Officer considers the matter would not warrant a more serious sanction.
(g) The allegation is politically motivated and/or ‘tit for tat’.
(h) The allegation is not considered sufficiently serious to merit the cost to the public of carrying out an investigation.
(i) The Monitoring Officer has facilitated an informal resolution of the complaint (see below) and the Mayor or Member/Co-opted Member complained about has offered to take remedial action that the Monitoring Officer considers appropriate in all the circumstances (for example by apologising to the complainant and/or undertaking training or issuing a statement of factual correction).
8. Where the Monitoring Officer decides to reject a complaint, they shall inform the complainant in writing giving the reasons for rejection.
Investigation and Monitoring of Complaints
9. If a complaint of failure to comply with the Code is referred for investigation the Monitoring Officer shall appoint an investigator or complete the investigation themself. Such investigation should whenever possible be completed within two months of the decision to refer the matter for investigation. The Monitoring Officer may extend this period by up to a further two months where they feel it is necessary to ensure a proper and adequate investigation.The Monitoring Officer may refer a complaint for investigation to the Monitoring Officer in a different authority where they have a conflict of interest.
10. The Monitoring Officer will keep the complainant and the subject Member informed as to progress at appropriate intervals and shall inform them of any extension to the period for the investigation.
11. The Monitoring Officer will report every six months to the Standards Advisory Committee on the number and nature of complaints received and action taken as a result. This will include details of complaints that have been rejected by the Monitoring Officer and any extension made to the period for an investigation of a complaint.
12. Where any investigation into a complaint of breach of the Code finds no evidence of failure to comply with the Code of Conduct, the Monitoring Officer shall within four weeks of receipt of the investigation report, consult with the Independent Person and decide whether the matter should be closed without reference to a Hearings Sub-Committee. The Monitoring Officer shall provide a copy of the report and findings of the investigation which shall be kept confidential to the complainant and to the Member concerned and shall report the matter as part of the quarterly report to the Standards Advisory Committee for information. The Monitoring Officer may also seek advice from the IDSC before deciding that a matter should be closed without reference to the Hearings Sub-Committee.
13. Where an investigation finds evidence of a failure to comply with the Code of Conduct, the Monitoring Officer following consultation with the Independent Person, may seek local resolution of the complaint. If local resolution succeeds the Monitoring Officer shall report the matter as part of the quarterly report to the Standards Advisory Committee. If local resolution does not succeed or if following consultation with the Independent Person, the Monitoring Officer considers that it is not appropriate to seek local resolution, the Monitoring Officer shall report the investigation findings to a Hearings Sub-Committee of the Standards Advisory Committee for local hearing and determination. The Hearings Sub-Committee will whenever practicable be convened within one month of the Monitoring Officer receiving the investigation report.
Hearings Sub-Committee
14. The Hearings Sub-Committee will consider the investigation report and any submissions from the subject Member and determine:
(a) If there has been a breach of the Code of Conduct having taken into account the views of the Independent Person; and if so
(b) Whether any sanction is appropriate having considered the views of the Independent Person.
15. Possible sanctions may include any of the following:-
(a) Publication of the Sub-Committee’s decision.
(b) Reporting the Sub-Committee’s decision to Council.
(c) Requesting the Monitoring Officer to arrange training for the Member (subject to the Member’s agreement).
(d) Issuing a censure or reprimand which may also be reported to Council.
(e) Requiring the Member to contact the Council and officers via specified point(s) of contact.
(f) Withdrawing facilities provided to the Member by the Council, such as a computer or internet access.
(g) Excluding the Member from the Council’s offices or other premises, with the exception of meeting rooms as necessary for attending Council, Executive, Committee and Sub-Committee meetings (as appropriate).
(h) Recommending to the Member’s Group Leader that they be removed from any or all Committees or Sub-Committees of the Council.
(i) Recommending to the Mayor that the Member be removed from the Executive, or removed from a particular portfolio responsibility.
(j) Recommending to Council or the Mayor as appropriate the removal from outside appointments to which the Member has been appointed or nominated.
(k) Recommending to Council that the Member be removed from any or all Council Committees or Sub-Committees.
16. In determining any recommended sanction the Hearings Sub-Committee may take into account any previous breach by the Member concerned and/or their compliance with any previous sanction applied.