Report of the MPA Standards Committee

Report: 17
Date: 26 October 2006
By: Chief Executive and Clerk

Summary

This report outlines matters considered at the recent meeting of the Authority’s Standards Committee.

A. Recommendation

That

1. the Authority receives the report of the Standards Committee; and
2. the Committee’s terms of reference be amended to include monitoring the Authority’s response to the Freedom of Information Act.

B. Supporting information

1. The MPA’s Standards Committee met on 5 October 2006. This report summarises the main issues considered at that meeting. The agenda and reports of that meeting are available on the MPA website.

Standards indicators

2. At each meeting the Committee considers a set of indicators that give some measure of what can broadly be described as ethical/good practice standards in the MPA. These are presented on a quarterly basis so that over time the Committee can see if there are any trends or areas of concern. There were no matters of concern in the data for the three quarters so far this year except that the Committee noted that no member had made any declarations of gifts or hospitality received. Whilst that might be because no gifts or hospitality had been offered/accepted, the Committee asked the officers to remind members of their obligations in this respect.

3. It was suggested to the Committee that as part of these indicators it could monitor the Authority’s response to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act, for instance in terms of numbers of cases dealt with within the statutory deadline and those where exemptions were applied and information withheld. It is therefore proposed that the following be added to the Committee’s terms of reference:

“To monitor the Authority’s response to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.”

Indemnity Scheme for Members

4. There is a separate report on the current agenda recommending an Indemnity Scheme for Members.

Guidance on behaviour and the use of language

5. Amongst local authorities generally, a common ground for complaints to the Standards Board for England is that a member used unacceptable language or behaviour towards others. The relevant paragraphs of the MPA Code of Conduct are paras 2 and 4:

“2. A member must –

1. promote equality by not discriminating unlawfully against any person;
2. treat others with respect; and
3. not do anything which compromises or which is likely to compromise the impartiality of a police officer or those who work for, or on behalf of, the Authority.

With regard to (a) above, a member will take account of the general duty of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act and the requirements of the MPA’s equality policy to:

• Eliminate discrimination
• Promote equality of opportunity; and
• Promote good relations between persons of different groups’

‘4. A member must not in his official capacity, or any other circumstance, conduct himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing his office or authority into disrepute.’

6. The Standards Committee agreed to ask the officers to develop guidance for members on what does and does not constitute acceptable behaviour and language. Members also discussed the extent to which some aspects of the Member Induction Process should be obligatory, such as ethical behaviour and member responsibilities under the Race Relations Amendment Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. It was recognised that the MPA Improvement Programme provided an impetus to take for ward some of this work now. The Committee therefore asked for proposals to be put to a future meeting.

MPA cases dealt with by the Standards Board for England

7. The Committee noted that the Standards Board for England (SBE) has recently completed investigations and come to a decision on five cases where allegations were made that MPA members had breached the Code of Conduct (four cases were the same allegation made jointly against four members). In the case involving Peter Herbert the SBE Ethical Standards Officer found that, in the circumstances of the case, no action needs to be taken. In the case involving Robert Neill, Richard Barnes, Anthony Arbour and Elizabeth Howlett the Ethical Standards Officer found no evidence of any failure to comply with the Code of Conduct. The case summaries can be found on the SBE website.

C. Race and equality impact

Equalities issues were addressed in the individual reports to the Standards Committee.

D. Financial implications

Financial implications were addressed in the individual reports to the Standards Committee.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Simon Vile, MPA

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback