Agenda and minutes

There were no declarations of interest.

(a)  To agree the minutes of the meeting held on 9 December, 2016

(b)  Matters arising

The Minutes of the meeting held on 9 December, 2016 were agreed and signed as a true record.

There were no matters arining.

(a)  Presentation of the Investigating Officer’s Report

(b)  Presentation of the Subject Member’s Response to the Investigation Report

(c)  Summing Up

(d)  Determination of Complaint

(e)  Sanctions (if applicable)

The Ethics Committee considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) which detailed a complaint made against Councillor J S Birdi (the “Subject Member”). The complainant alleged that Councillor Birdi had breached the Code of Conduct for Elected and Co-opted Members in a number of ways.

A Stage One review of the complaint concluded that an Independent Investigator should be appointed to investigate the complaint. An Independent Investigator was initially appointed to carry out the investigation and he concluded that Councillor Birdi had breached the Code of Conduct. Following unforeseen circumstances, a second Independent Investigator was appointed and he came to the same conclusion.

The Subject Member did not agree with the Investigators’ conclusions and had requested that the complaint be referred to a hearing of the Ethics Committee.

The Committee considered the following:-

a)  Preliminary matters for determination

b)  Presentation of the Investigating Officer’s report

c)  Presentation of the Subject Member’s response to the Investigation report

d)  Summing up from both the Investigation Officer and the Subject Member

e)  Views and submissions of the Independent Person

The Committee then determined the complaint and concluded that there had been breaches of the Code of Conduct. Before determining what sanctions, if any, should be applied, the Independent Person and the Subject Member were invited to make representations as to whether or not any sanctions should be applied and, if so, what form they should take. The Committee noted that the application of any sanction should be reasonable and proportionate to the Subject Member’s behaviour.

RESOLVED that the conclusion of the Committee be as set out in the Decision Letter attached as Appendix 1 to these Minutes. 

    APPENDIX 1

COVENTRY CITY COUNCIL

DECISION NOTICE OF ETHICS COMMITTEE

A  Complaint by: Mr Nagarajah Kuruparan

(“the Complainant”)

B  Subject Member: Councillor Jaswant SinghBirdi

C  Introduction

1.  On 17 March 2017, the Ethics Committee of Coventry City Council considered a report of an investigation into the alleged conduct of Councillor Jaswant Singh Birdi, a member of Coventry City Council. A general summary of the complaint is set out below.

D  Complaint summary

2.  The Complainant made a number of allegations about the behaviour of Councillor Birdi. These can be summarised asfollows:

2.1  By raising concerns about litter near a property that he owned, Councillor Birdi was acting in his own interests and not in the public interest. This was contrary to Paragraphs 2(a) and 3(a) of the Code of Conduct.

2.2  Councillor Birdi should have referred his concerns to a councillor for the ward where the litter was located and this was contrary to Paragraph 3(b) of theCode.

2.3  Councillor Birdi should have remained objective and should not have assumed that the litter was the fault of the Complainant; he shouldnot have become angry and personal when raising his concerns with the Complainant. This was in breach of Paragraph 3(e) of theCode.

2.4  Councillor Birdi should have been clear, from the outset of his interaction with the Complainant,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

The Committee considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) which detailed proposals for a new Complaints Protocol following a review of the existing Protocol, which was approved in 2012. The report detailed reasons for the proposals and indicated that the review had drawn on recent experience and practice.

An Appendix to the report detailed the proposed revised Complaints Protocol, which was shorter than the existing one and, it was hoped, simpler and easier to navigate and understand. The report highlighted a number of proposed changes and sought the Committee’s views on those changes. In particular, the Committee welcomed the fact that, where the Committee had decided that a Councillor had breached the Code of Conduct, the revised Protocol included seeking the views of the Investigating officer before sanctions are applied in order to assist the Committee in determining the seriousness of the matter and the level of appropriate sanctions.

RESOLVED that the Ethics Committee:-

(1)  Approves the revised Complaints Protocol as appended to the report 

(2)  Authorises the Legal Services Manager (Place and Regulatory) to publish and publicise the revised Complaints Protocol

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

The Committee considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) which indicated that the Council’s Whistleblowing Policy had been reviewed in light of the Rotherham report where that Council was criticised for not having effective procedures in place for reporting suspected wrongdoing. As a result of the review, a new draft Policy had been prepared.

The Committee were requested to consider the draft Policy, which was appended to the report, and forward any suggestions for additions or amendments to the Policy to the Audit and Procurement Committee, who are responsible for monitoring the Council’s policies on whistleblowing, and to the Cabinet Member for Policy and Leadership, who will have the final decision on approving the Policy.

The Council is not required by law to have a Whistleblowing Policy, however it is recommended in government guidance and by Public Concern at Work that employers should, as a matter of best practice, have such a Policy. One of the key concerns raised in the Rotherham report was that the Whistleblowing Policy was inadequate and did not provided adequate protection to whistle-blowers. The review of the City Council’s Policy had sought to address these concerns through the use of safeguards and protections for individuals.

The report outlined the proposed amendments to the Policy.

RESOLVED that the Ethics Committee recommends that the Audit and Procurement Committee and the Cabinet Member for Policy and Leadership approve the revised Whistleblowing Policy as appended to the report.  

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

The Committee considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) which provided an update on national issues in relation to the ethical behaviour of elected members and the local position in Coventry with regards to Code of Conduct issues.

The Committee discussed three cases from different Councils and noted the outcome for each. The Committee also noted that Rotherham Council had asked the Department for Communities and Local Government to review the standards provisions of the Localism Act 2011 to see what could be done to avoid circumstances in which an individual Councillor convicted of a sexual offence (but not in receipt of a custodial sentence of three months or more) could remain in office as a Councillor.  The Committee expressed their concern that, under the current standards provisions, this could be allowed to happen.

In terms of the local picture, the Committee noted that one complaint had been received since the last Committee meeting in December 2016 and that this was being dealt with at Stage 1 by the Acting Monitoring Officer. The Committee also noted that no complaints had been received by the Monitoring Officer in respect of Allesley, Finham or Keresley Parish Councils.

RESOLVED that the Ethics Committee:-

(1)   Notes the cases determined under the new regime nationally and requests that the Legal Services Manager, Place and Regulatory, in consultation with the Chair, shares the case updates with all elected Members and;

(2)  Notes the local position relating to the Council’s Code of Conduct and delegates any actions arising from these to the Legal Services Manager, Place and Regulatory, in consultation with the Chair of the Ethics Committee

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

The Committee considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) which outlined details of declarations of gifts and hospitality made by Members since the Committee last reviewed these at its meeting on 16 September, 2016.

RESOLVED that the entries contained in the Registers of Members’ Gifts and Hospitality from 17 September, 2016 to 28 February, 2017 be noted.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

The Committee considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) which set out the entries in the Registers of Officers’ Gifts and Hospitality for the period 1 July, 2016 to 31 December, 2016.

The Committee received assurances from the Legal Services Manager, Place and Regulatory, in relation to the anonymising of the details relating to junior members of staff in the report and were informed that full details of those members of staff were contained in the Registers to ensure transparency.

RESOLVED that the entries contained in the Registers of Officers’ Gifts and Hospitality for the period 1 July, 2016 to 31 December, 2016 be noted.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place)

The Committee considered a report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Place) appended to which was a proposed Work Programme for the Committee for 20117/18. In particular, the Committee noted the proposed inclusion of an Annual Report on the Committee’s activities during the year, which would be submitted to a Council meeting.

RESOLVED that approval be given to the proposed Work Programme for Ethics Committee for 2017/18 as appended to the report.

To consider any other items of business which the Cabinet Member decides to take as a matter of urgency because of the special circumstances involved.

There were no other items of urgent public business.