Minutes

Minutes of the Standards Committee of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 26 September 2008 at 10 Dean Farrar Street, London SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Stephanie Caplan
• Anne Dickens
• Toby Harris
• Kirsten Hearn

MPA officers

• Simon Vile (Head of Corporate Secretariat)
• David Riddle (Solicitor to the Authority)

Also present: Christopher Boothman

1. Apologies for absence and communications

(Agenda item 1)

No apologies received. Members asked that their thanks be recorded to former members Aneeta Prem and John Roberts for their contribution to the work of the committee.

2. Declarations of interests

(Agenda item 2)

No declarations were made.

3. Election of Chair and Vice Chair

Nominations for the positions of Chair and Vice Chair of the Committee were sought.

Members noted that the Chair had to be one of the two committee members who are independent of the Authority.

It was proposed, seconded and

Resolved – That Stephanie Caplan be appointed Chair of the Committee and Anne Dickens be appointed Vice Chair of the Committee until the next meeting of the Committee following the MPA’s Annual Meeting in June 2009.

4. Minutes

(Agenda item 3)

Members considered the minutes of the Standard Committee meeting held on 10 April 2008.

Resolved – That the minutes of the Standard Committee meeting held on 10 April 2008 be agreed and be signed as a correct record.

Matters arising: Anne Dickens referred to training that the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority was arranging for the members of its Standards Committee. She suggested that it might be possible for MPA Standards Committee members to participate in this. Simon Vile was asked to discuss with LFEPA.

5. Local handling of complaints against members

(Agenda item 4)

Members considered a report that proposed a procedure and other actions required to implement the Standards Committee’s responsibility for the handling and assessment of complaints against MPA members, where there has been an allegation that they have breached the MPA’s code of conduct.

It was noted that the proposed procedure met the requirements of the regulations, which were very prescriptive on some aspects. The MPA procedure also drew on the Greater London Authority procedure so that there was a consistency of approach between the two authorities.

The committee discussed various aspects of the procedure. As drafted, the procedure did not allow for anonymous complaints, although the identity of the complainant could be treated as confidential if there were grounds to do so. There might be circumstances where arguably this confidentiality should be maintained throughout the process – the officers were asked to clarify the position with regard to anonymity.

Members noted that there were broad timescales for the assessment stage onwards but none at the early stage of the process. It was agreed that there should be a target of five working days for the Monitoring Officer to acknowledge receipt of the complaint. At that early stage it would be open to the Monitoring Officer to go back to the complainant for more information to assist with the assessment process, which would be paper based. Where a complaint was investigated, it would not be possible to give a complainant a realistic timescale; however it was important that contact was maintained with the complainant to keep them informed during the investigation.

It was agreed that if a complaint was settled by informal resolution, this outcome should be formally reported to the Standards Committee.

It was agreed that the Committee would publish anonymised information about cases, including decisions reached.

The officers were asked to produce a flowchart of the process for handling complaints.

It was agreed that members give any comments on the proposed procedure to Simon Vile within ten days, following which he would be authorised to finalise the procedure in consultation with the Chair.

In terms of the committee membership it was felt that it would be possible to operate with a minimum membership of six although problems would arise if a complaint was about one of the Committee members.

Resolved

1. That the MPA procedures for handling complaints, and associated guidance, be approved, subject to any further comments from members, with the Head of Corporate Secretariat authorised to finalise the procedures in consultation with the Chair; and
2. That three sub-committees be established to carry out the various functions under the Act: an Assessment Sub-committee, a Review Sub-committee and a Hearings Sub-committee. Membership of each of these sub-committees to comprise three members of the Committee, one of which will be an external Independent Member, who shall chair the sub-committee.

6. Any other business

None.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback