Minutes

of the Meeting of the

Standards Committee

Thursday 8th September 2005

held at the Town Hall, Weston-super-Mare, Somerset.

Meeting Commenced: 5.30 p.m. Meeting Concluded: 6.25 p.m.

Present:

North Somerset Councillors: Councillors Ian Parker (Chairman), and Jenny Gosden

Independent Member: Mr. Tony Williams (Vice-Chairman)

Parish/Town Council Members: Councillors Tony Horry and Jack Dagnall

Apologies for absence: Councillors Nick Brown and Ian Peddlesden, and Mr. Peter Barrett

STD 11

Public Participation (Standing Order 17) (Agenda Item 2)

Mr. Michael Brookes, a local resident and member of the Senior Citizens’ Forum, addressed the Committee regarding communications with the public and citizens’ rights.

Mr. Brookes thanked the Solicitor to the Council for the reply to the points he had raised at the last meeting. However, he considered that the reply did not fully acknowledge problems, nor progress matters. He asked the Committee if they agreed there was a problem with Councillors/public communication and consultation and, if so, what ideas Members had for improvement.

Mr. Brookes added that in considering the reply from the Solicitor to the Council, he had referred to the Constitution which he regarded as difficult to understand. He commented that there was no proper glossary, and that various terms and definitions were not clear.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Brookes for his address, and asked him to provide the written details of his comments and comments which would be circulated to the Committee Members.

The Solicitor to the Council added that he would be happy to meet again with Mr. Brooks to discuss the points he had raised.

STD 12

Minutes of the Meeting held on 7th July 2005 (Agenda Item 4.1)

Resolved: that the minutes of the meeting held on 7th July 2005 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

STD 13

Annual Letter from the Local Government Ombudsman (Agenda Item 6.1)

The Committee was invited to review the Annual Letter.

Members noted that whilst there was a continuing rise in the number or complaints being made, the total number of cases where the Council was found at fault had declined slightly. The Solicitor to the Council commented that this suggested that people were less willing to tolerate actions and decisions with which they disagreed, and more willing to complain, rather than that performance was deteriorating. It was also considered that it was reasonable to assume that a problem lay with the handling of complaints rather than the actions.

Discussion focused on the procedure of handling complaints. It was noted that there was a Complaints Officer based in the Chief Executive’s Office. Members commented on whether there was a need for a clearer structure within Directorates to deal more promptly and effectively with public complaints. The suggestion was made for there to be at best one complaints officer in each Directorate.

The Committee was referred to the complaints training offered by the Ombudsman, and considered that it would be beneficial for North Somerset officers to be suitably trained in order to improve performance.

Resolved:

(1) that in order to improve performance, arrangements be made for relevant officers to attend training on complaints handling from the Local Government Ombudsman;

(2) that the Solicitor to the Council as Monitoring Officer, consult with Directorates on which would be the best approach to promptly and efficiently deal with complaints within Directorates, and report back to this Committee.

STD 14

Reform of Public Sector Ombudsman Services (Agenda Item 6.2)

The Committee considered what response it wished to make to the Government Consultation Paper on a proposed regulatory reform order to modernise and co-ordinate the principal public sector Ombudsman services: the Parliamentary Ombudsman, the Health Service Ombudsman, and the Local Government Ombudsman.

Following discussion it was

Resolved: that the Solicitor to the Council respond to the Consultation Paper on the Reform of Public Sector Ombudsman Services as follows:-

(1) Proposal 1 – Power to Work Collaboratively

Agreed in principle.

(2) Proposal 2 – Delegation of Powers

Agreed.

(3) Proposal 3 – Power to Issue Guidance

Agreed that this would be sensible.

(4) Proposal 4 – Alternative Resolution of Complaints

Whilst mediation would be useful, it was not clear who would bear the cost.

(5) Proposal 5 – Exhaustion of Remedies

It was not clear how, in practice, this was to be implemented.

________________________________

Chairman

________________________________