THE BURDEN OF PROOF

Question

I am in the position in which most Cllrs dont attach any significance to standing orders or the Fin Regs and just muddle through.  This manifests itself in an elite of Cllrs forming and controlling most decisions and clerks who help set and enforce policies and procedures which support the foregoing . Most recently I asked for a policy to be set on delegation and got nowhere.  Meanwhile,  the delegated committees spend money without having a clue as to what powers they have.  When I asked whether S137 had been used several  Cllrs said "whats that".  Then last week was the straw that broke the camels back when the clerk asked for a certain function to be delegated herself and a nominated Cllr .  I feel the only way forward has to be a complaint against selected Cllrs under the heading of a lack of leadership and integrity .  How does one go about this ie are there standard forms and what is the level of proof required.  Our monitoring officer simply says "cant give you any advice but will decide on the evidence provided" .  Having spend half of my life as a procedural auditor I find the whole system is (I am struggling to find an adjective) dysfunctional .  Just would appreciate some advice on the best way to go about things .

Answer 1

I'm not clear where this is going. What are you expecting the Monitoring Officer to do for you? Have a look at the definitions of the Nolan Principles on Gov.uk. Integrity relates to personal financial gain and being beholden to others. Leadership relates to the application of the other six principles. The Principles are not well defined and are difficult to enforce until we reach the unlawful threshold. We know that there are issues with the way your Council is being run, but I see them as incompetence rather than unlawful actions.

The forms will be on your principal council's website under Code of Conduct. You submit your complaint, the other party responds and the MO comes to a view on whether the Code of Conduct has been breached. The ultimate sanction, unless the law has been broken, is that the MO will tell them they've been naughty and shouldn't do it again. They may also recommend a training course, but can't enforce this.

As always, Internal Auditor and the ballot box represent better options.

Answer 2

In my experience 90% of the Councillors I’ve met have no idea what’s in Standing Orders or Financial Regs
I know of one case where paperwork for an ongoing project was “ lost “ and no one turned a hair
MO’s are not concerned with how a Parish Council runs or rather some are concerned but can do nothing
I know exactly what you are going through

Answer 3

It frustrates me that councillors do not take their responsibilities seriously and considering the levels of public money and reserves that they are responsible for, it is shocking.

I had one councillor who has been a councillor for roughly 15 years and didn't know that our standing orders are on our website and have been for 6 years.

Other councillors, despite being given standing orders and financial regs every May in their agenda pack, are still not aware of their existence.

Some councillors are excellent, public spirited with a genuine desire to do good for their community. Others, consider themselves volunteers (which legally they're not) and therefore are only interested in turning up to meetings (if at all) and voting with no preparation.

As DtC says, the only solution is the ballot box I'm afraid as the MO has no power. That and compulsory training, as is required for school governors.

Comments

Good solid advice all. It  is as I suspected. Ultimately change has to come from within or as someone famously quoted "Physician heal thyself".

Answer 4

I’d suggest that your only realistic option is actually the external auditor and even that is pretty pointless and just as difficult as getting a (so-called) monitoring officer to take a view.
Despite your self declared 1/2 a life as a procedural auditor you appear to be displaying an acute lack of appreciate of procedure by attempting to pursue a code of conduct route.
Your problem will be the complete inability to hold INDIVIDUAL Cllrs to account after (assuming there has been) a vote by the PC. Example, if you clerk wants something delegated to them and there is a vote passed at PC it becomes a corporate decision rather than a decision of an individual(s).
You need to DEMONSTRATE that an individual has potentially breached the code of conduct - but first YOU need to understand what constitutes a breach otherwise you’re wasting your time.
From the very limited information available it ‘sounds’ like your best options would be a challenge at AGAR - failed to maintain an adequate system of financial management. But even if the EA investigates (that’ll be a big enough challenge!) and then finds a deficiency (an even greater unlikelihood) all that will actually happen is a bill for a couple of hrs EA time (£350/hr) and a letter saying must do better in the future.
What you need is to get your community engagement and awareness up and running. To hell with the PC, do it independently!

Answer 5

I have for some time now stated that councillors must become a truly professional group ( not paid) and build a professional body to which election is the door to a graduated nomenclature system of assessment as to knowledge and experience of each councillor member. Such a body would automatically give clear indications of the experience and commitment of each councillor to electorate and other bodies. It would allow for the body to be able to enforce levels of professionalism on councillors which do not at the moment exist anywhere. It would allow the electorate to assess candidates at election time and to make measured assessments of that professionalism.

It would also open the door for a councillors body to have a much larger say in the requirements of running a council rather than relying on commercial unelected bodies to continually lay down the "rules" by which councils are run.

It would also allow a laid down procedure for encouraging councillors to be censured for " not meeting laid down professional standards" ( demotion of nomenclature level and requalifying to gain back).

Councillors "heal thine selves" YES! every time. The ball is in your court.

Discuss?

Comments

Spot on Mentorman

---

It would appear to be a reasonable aspiration at first glance but completely unworkable in reality since (a) there is already a tangible delta of willing and capable Cllrs (evidenced by uncontested elections and unfilled seats) which would very likely be exacerbated by an entry criteria and (b) you can either have "professional" OR you can have "unpaid."  It's one or the other.

Although - if Cllrs are to be 'professional' then there is no need of a paid clerk
Discuss?

---

All councillors would start at the entry level and as proof of progression and as education and experience met the association/institutes criteria the next level would be attained and so on until the top grade of say "fellow" could be the target thus giving targets of attainment of professionalism. Not designed to remove a paid clerk but to ensure that the clerk was removed as the pseudo policeman and voice of the council ( as some organisations would wish).
A professional definition of excellence of councillors. Not profession confused with payment for duty

---

Here is an example of the games they play.  I originally resigned after 3 days because our clerk refused me access to LTNs . Then after taking advice form this board and with lots of local backing I got an election called and applied for my own vacancy.  Unfortunately at the time of the election there were two seats advertised and I was the only applicant and of course ever since the second vacancy continues to be advertised and our PC billed.   I am of course seen as being  to blame !!.
I see however our clerk has chosen to report matters to the press and has named and shamed me https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/local-news/somerset-village-keeps-holding-elections-7995144?IYA-mail=76ae03b5-74a5-4729-b616-ed5d6167e608.   Would the clerks on this board consider that as appropriate ?

---

Reading the article, it is just statements of fact and process.  The Clerk hasn't named and shamed you - it is in the public domain that you stood for election and subsequently resigned.  It is not even clear that the Parish Clerk reported this to the press but that they could have contacted her for a comment, which she did.

As an aside, as a councillor you should be able to access the LTNs from NALC as the council as a whole are members of that association and LTNs are available for all.  I have given my councillors the log in details for the page and if they choose to look, they can.

---

It should come as NO SURPRISE that any "#Live" online media outlet presents an ill informed, incomplete and amateurish reportage.  The nationwide #Live online news outlet is parented by the media group Reach PLC which includes such leftist gutter press red tops as the Daily Mirror, Daily Star, Daily Record, Daily Express, OK magazine and other such low ball publications.  It's garbage, served up online rather than in tomorrows chip paper.    
The article throws up more questions than answers and demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the process born out of amateurish, lazy and incomplete journalism.

Don't worry about what the media says about what's happening, just focus on what you CAN change for the better.
You should make a formal written request to the clerk for the NALC and county ALC login and password details.  You are entitled - and should be ENCOURAGED - as a Cllr to access, read, absorb and apply all of the information which is made available by those organisations and which your council pays a subscription for.

Your clerk has no authority to refuse it and if they do so you should commence a disciplinary complaint against them.
It is just wrong on all levels that a clerk should seek to prevent a Cllr accessing information which is specifically produced for the furtherance of efficiency, effectiveness and compliance in council business.  It is also commonly a firm indicator of an empire building, 'knowledge is power", professionally insecure - or potentially corrupt or incompetent - employee that needs to suppress the active investigation of inquisitive Cllrs.

Such behaviour is a very high and strong RED FLAG which could be a determined attempt to prevent exposure of inadequacies and should be addressed without compromise.