Minutes:
The Monitoring Officer introduced her report into a complaint received that the
Mayor had breached the Member Code of Conduct by failing to make full
disclosures in the Register of Members’ Interests in relation to his position in
several companies.
The Monitoring Officer reported her conclusions that technically the Mayor
was in breach of the requirement to register the two directorships. The
situation had been rectified and the Mayor had not participated in any decision
which would affect either of the two companies. It was noted that the Mayor’s
directorship in these companies arose as a result of his position in the Local
Government Association ( LGA), which position was registered in the
Members’ Register of Interests. The Monitoring Officer further reported that
the Mayor had apologised to her and also brought the Sub Committee’s
attention to his letter dated 24th April 2017 which extended his apology to the
Standards Committee.
The Monitoring Officer further explained that in accordance with statutory
requirements and the Council’s procedures her report had to be submitted to
the Independent Person whose views the Sub Committee were required to
consider before reaching a decision.
The Sub Committee’s attention was specifically drawn to the Independent
Person, Wendy Innes’ report at Appendix 5. Her report concurred with the
Monitoring Officer’s findings that a technical breach had occurred. The
Independent Person’s report then proceeded to list factors which in her
view mitigated the seriousness of the breach. These were :-
information provided by the LGA, referred to at paragraph 13 of the
Monitoring Officer’s report, to be effectively dormant, and that it has
never conducted any business; hence although the company’s objects
enable it to exercise functions of a public nature, it may never have
done so;
confirmed that the Council has not made any decisions
affecting either of these two companies of which the Mayor is a
director; hence the Mayor has not participated in any Council decision
making in respect of either of the companies;
this oversight;
of Members’ Interests to include these two directorships as soon as the
Monitoring Officer advised him of the concern.
In conclusion, the Independent Person intimated that should the Sub-
Committee reach a finding of breach of the Code it may consider that the
breach is of such a minor nature that it does not merit further action, for
instance by way of sanction.
Members of the Sub Committee raised various questions in relation to the
Monitoring Officer’s report, which the Monitoring Officer responded to. It was
suggested that consideration be given to the Member Code of Conduct being
amended to include a requirement that the registration of membership or
position of control in a body to which members are appointed or nominated by
the Council be extended to include a reference to any subsidiary or
associated companies or other organisations of that body.
After very careful consideration the Sub Committee unanimously:
RESOLVED that:
(1) there was a breach of paragraphs 4.4 and 4.5 of the Member Code
of Conduct;
(2) the views of the Independent Person and the mitigating factors referred to
in her report be endorsed;
(3) in accordance with the views of the Independent Person the breach does
not merit any further action by way of sanction;
(4) on the next review of the Member Code of Conduct it be clarified that the
requirement to register any interest in a company or outside body extends to
associated companies and other organisations established by that body.
The meeting ended at 07:20 p.m.
Supporting documents: