Minutes:
A Code of Conduct complaint had been received from a member of the public following reports in the media that County Councillor Mrs Oborski had allegedly played an electronic card game on an iPad during a Full Council meeting.
The Head of Legal and Democratic Services consulted the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Standards and Ethics Committee and decided that the complaint raised a matter of public concern which should be pursued. It was agreed to do this through a public meeting of the Committee to consider the issue of member conduct at meetings as a whole and the principles involved, rather than an investigation into whether there had been a Code breach in the specific circumstances alleged. The Committee's role included promoting high standards of member conduct and providing general guidance, and it could then give guidance as appropriate to all Members to help them understand the Code's requirements and how their actions might appear to observers.
The Code provided general guidance on what was acceptable and unacceptable conduct but the Council has provided little express guidance to Councillors on specific behaviour such as the level of attention/courtesy to be paid during meetings. The closest guidance was the protocol on the use of social media which took a balanced view and accepted that Members might wish to use social media (eg comments on Twitter or Facebook) during meetings as part of engaging democratically with the public, but exhorted Members to pay attention during decision-making debates.
Members might leave the Council Chamber for a variety of reasons during relatively lengthy Council meetings. This tended not to happen at other member meetings. For quasi-judicial meetings such as Planning and Regulatory Committee, and Appointments etc Panel, the Member was required as a matter of law to be present for the whole of the discussion before voting. With regard to other meetings, the law permits some more flexibility and it was possible that (as in Parliament) Members might not be present for the entirety of all agenda items. There were also some items (eg Formal Question Time in full Council) in which a particular Member might not be directly involved.
In the ensuing debate, the following principal points were raised:
(a) The Head of Legal and Democratic Services commented that both Mrs Oborski and the complainant had been informed of the approach taken with regard to the complaint made
(b) Members needed to consider whether more prescriptive guidance was required for the conduct of Members at meetings for a variety of reasons. In particular, although standards of conduct were the same for each meeting, such guidance could focus on behaviour at meetings of full Council given the length and amount of 'toing and froing' which took place. Members might also wish to consider whether more breaks should be taken during the course of a Council meeting for health reasons
(c) Although the use of electronic games during council meetings was unacceptable, it must be acknowledged that members increasingly accessed information electronically during meetings. The Chairman had an important role in setting the tone of the meeting with respect to the legitimate use of electronic or social media
(d) It was not acceptable for someone serving a customer in a local supermarket to play electronic games and it was no different for members attending a meeting, who should be concentrating on the business in hand. It was acknowledged that members could be legitimately accessing electronic or social media sites and therefore it would be beneficial for members to receive further guidance about what behaviour is appropriate during meetings
(e) It was important that members listened to the debate and were not distracted by other non-work related activities. This was particularly applicable to quasi-judicial meetings where the Council could be left open to challenge
(f) The public perception was that Members had been elected to carry out their duties on behalf of their constituents. If it was felt that Members were not giving their full attention to the business in hand then there were implications for the reputation of the Council
(g) Members should be particularly respectful during the public participation agenda item. Public participants had taken the time and effort to attend the meeting to raise their concerns and Members should respectfully listen to their concerns without being distracted by electronic communication in any form
(h) The majority of decisions taken by elected members were of a non-controversial nature therefore the implications of a Member being distracted during a debate was likely to have a minimal impact on the business of the Council
(i) It was discourteous for members of scrutiny panels not to give their full attention to the views of external parties (invited to address the panel) during the debate
(j) Observing Members attending a meeting should not be held to the same standards of attention as the voting members. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services acknowledged that there was a distinction between the two roles at Cabinet meetings. Non-Cabinet Members were essentially observers and therefore had greater flexibility in relation to their attention at Cabinet meetings
(k) There was a consensus that it was not acceptable for Members to be playing games whether a meeting was webcast or not. The public were encouraged to attend council meetings and view them on the webcast. Members should be aware of the public perception of their actions as an individual and for the Council as a whole
(l) The Head of Legal and Democratic Services should be authorised to prepare a guidance note for all councillors on the proper conduct of members in meetings for consideration at the next meeting of the Standards and Ethics Committee, and to consult the Member Advisory Group.
RESOLVED that the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to prepare a guidance note for all councillors on the proper conduct of members in meetings for consideration at the next meeting of the Standards and Ethics Committee and to consult the Member Advisory Group.