I recently read your article from April 2006 about the Standards Board. My wife and I are currently under investigation by them for alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct and have bent over backwards to cooperate with their investigator. We have been sent a draft copy of their findings and transcripts of interviews with complainants and witnesses, the whole package being inches thick of double side printing. We [have been given two weeks to respond] which... allows us no time at all to go through everything.
Our main concern, having read the transcript and the draft report is that any evidence or statements that are in any way critical of us get included and yet anything said in our favour is rejected. This happens even when both statements are made by the same person, so that when one witness says something to the effect that we can be a bit opinionated and want things done our way, that is included in the report, but when she makes many criticisms of the the other councillors, the way meetings were chaired and the withholding of information and secrecy that surrounded the council's operation and so on, these things are ignored.
By no stretch of the imagination are we being given a fair hearing. It is as if they set out to find us guilty and that's what they have done. This investigation has been going on for months and my wife and I are regretting that we ever decided to stand for the Parish Council in the first place. We are both retired and felt that we could make a contribution for the good of the village. We were quite saddened when we realised that the other councillors were not only lazy and interested in nothing that wasn't in their interest but totally against any form of openness or public consultation. We were always treated as the outsiders as we moved here 10 years ago and in this part of [the country] that is consider to be a transient.
During council meetings voices were raised and this is what we are charged with, 'being disrespectful'. I know of no other area were respect does not have to be earned. We are at aloss as to what to do. We believed that justice would prevail and, although we might receive some criticism they would not find against us. The draft report suggests that our crimes are, in fact, so bad that our punishment is beyond the Standards Board's powers so they are going to sent it to the Adjudication Panel. Frankly, in one way I will be delighted if we are banned for ever from serving on Council, the stress this has caused us has been extraordinary as has been its effect on our village, splitting it into factions. On the other hand, we just don't think this is right and want to fight on, but can't get any help or advice from anyone.
We cannot get involved in any expensive legal battle, and frankly think that as the Standards Board seems to be a law unto itself that it would just be money wasted anyway. We are at a loss as to how to fight on. If you have any advice, or know where we should turn for help, it will be most gratefully received.
I have published this in ins entirety as I know from other emails that it reflects a growing frustration with the way the Standards Board operates. Is it any wonder that most people think going into local politics is just not worth the candle?
Do leave any advice for my correspondents in the comments.
I was on the Standards Committee on the Council when I was a District Councillor.
ReplyDeleteI sat on the first hearing against a councillor and can tell you that the evidence on paper given to us by the Standards Board was quite disgraceful.
As this councillor states they left out anything which was in favour of the councillor and put in evidence which would not be allowed in any court of law. Heresay! had nothing on this particular case.
Statements were taken OVER THE PHONE! and if one witness had not taped what he had said, we would never have known how his 'statement' had been edited! Quite disgraceful.
I am convinced that the Tories should promise to completely overhaul this disgraceful legislation.
It is right that standards in public life should have some teeth! BUT this is another glimpse into 1984 revisited.
I suggest that this councillor writes back and states that he/she needs extra time to prepare their defence! That should they refuse his, reasonable, request, he will be forced to attend the High Court to seek an injunction against them. Justice if anything demands fair play.
Sadly he.she will not get it from this incompetent crowd.
The Standards Board are an organisation that does no good to the cause of politics. It makes major issues out of minor ones either through it's own actions or because of the way the press is used to elevate issues and accusations.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, although they themselves remain largely unreformed in the way they act as judge, jury and executioner, their success when tested in court is, as I understand it, very poor - it is just a shame that many Councillors do not have the financial wherewithal to take things that far.
Advice: Don't stand for council until the system is reformed and goes back to the way it to be.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that we now have professional councillors taking huge whacks of taxpayers heard earned, and as a result, we have to 'police them' just in case they are (a) corrupt, (b) crap and (c) don;t fit the mould of what a councillor shold be according to New Labour rhetoric!
And the only way to police them is (not by applying common sense as it used to be), by typical new Labour bureaucracy, reports, investigations, hearings, appeals, and a whole load of pointless expensive corporate b******s which only serves to give over mighty and petty bureaucrats which sit on these bodies a pay packet and sense of importance.
This is a typical outcome of a typical new Labour approach to how everything should be run.
Power to the people - but only if they are on the right Quango!
On another point - what is the viewpoint on elected Mayors? I hear some are now just acting like Ken Livingstone - elected dictators, beyond the rule of anybody.
ReplyDeleteThats the trouble isn't it - you give someone to much centralised power that democracy cannot have a hold over them, so you have to have a new body )standards committees) to police them.
But who polices the police!
Your correspondents don't say where they are, if they are party political, or what they are alleged to have done. Or even whether they in fact admit anything.
ReplyDeleteStandards Board is problematic of course. But there are those who hail decisions when they like them and diss them when they don't which is not on.
My advice to your correspondents would be to forget the "he said, she said, they said" exchanges and cut to the meat of the matter.
Has there been a breach? If so is it technical and non serious? Technical and more serious? Beyond a technicality?
Admit whatever is behind it and apologise. If that's not good enough just let it go.
Sounds like the process may be out of all proprtion to the problems and that the process has become the be all and end all.
Unpack it. Repack it. Apologise if appropriate. Forget the tooing and froing.
Adrian Yelland writes, re elected mayors: "I hear some are now just acting like Ken Livingstone - elected dictators, beyond the rule of anybody."
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the deep-rooted problems of Britain. Elected mayors and elected sheriffs are the way the United States is run and every single one of those people is intensely aware that he is answerable to the electorate.
But the English just cannot handle power. They think getting an official position elevates them to the level of "their betters" of centuries ago and makes them into little feudal lords. They just cannot handle it. They don't even understand the concept, that every American standing for office, from the school board to the presidency, understands: they are being elected to SERVE THE ELECTORATE, at the electorate's pleasure, and not to be elevated to being their fuedal lord and master.
This is one thing that has long revolted me about the English. Their tiny-minded greed for power over others. I have never known another country so heaviy populated with jobsworths, either. In fact, I've never encountered a jobsworth, that I can remember, in any other country. The hunger for power over others makes me sick.
So Chris Paul's advice is to admit guilt even if you're guilty or not?
ReplyDeleteEspecially when it seems that this might have a huge impact upon your reputation in the community and likely have knock on effects to other parts of their lives?
Talk about being an April fool.
My direct experience of the Standards Board hasn't been great, mainly because of the slow nature of their work. However, they were thorough in their investigations.
ReplyDeleteWithout knowing the other side to your correspondent's case I'm reluctant to comment further, as there has to be a lot more to it.
Is this Britain or China, its a disgrace. One councellor who was objecting to a development was critisized for not declaring an interest and he should not have made comment. His interest was that he lived in the area and was speaking for those who elected him.
ReplyDeleteJust what you would expect from Labour stop all debate in the name of standards.
First of all accept that you are not going to win. Someone(s) have the knife out for you and even if you survived the investigation then some other way would be found to settle the grudge.
ReplyDeleteOnce you accept that you can't win, have some fun and either walk away or spend a little time making it damn difficult and time consuming for the investigation to make progress. Query the missing information, reschedule any hearing because of last minute health problems, only one of you turn up, etc. etc.
Can you send the Standards Committee a Freedom Of Information enquiry about the evidence held by the Committee? Or failing that send an enquiry under the Data Protection Act asking for all the personal information held?
Then you have grounds for challenging the report, or if they fail to justify non-response you can challenge that (with an Ombudsman perhaps?) either through the courts (expensive) or the local press.
Walking away will be less stressful, but you may regret letting others win by default.
Have a look at the MUllaney Hendricks case for a really amazing example of Standards Board stupidity.
ReplyDeleteThe answer is to appeal to the High Court. I don't mind helping with this.
It is awfully sad that good people who wanted to benefit their village should feel so let down like this. I know democracy is supposed to be the worst system, except for all the others, but so many people let their petty personal rivalries and greivances dominate in local politics.
ReplyDeleteSomebody once pointed out to me how many people on the standard board were also in the freemasons - then asked me "Only one thing can be so strong that would allow people to be lorded over in such a way in the masons?" I replied "I have no idea what that can be, these seem like family men."
ReplyDeleteWho are the "Standards Board" ? Are they named anywhere, what are they paid and what do they claim they have done? Not footling generalisms - what specifically have they done and what did that cost. Until they are open and transparent then they must belong to the smoke & mirrors of political pretence.
ReplyDeleteLancaster
So Chris Paul's advice is to admit guilt even if you're guilty or not?
ReplyDeleteHis advice, which seems to me quite reasonable, is to take a long hard look and ask "could I, in any way, have been thought to be disrespectful". If the answer is yes, admit it as soon as possible and apologise - you will probably only be slapped on the wrist.
Only if you're 100% sure your innocent - under any interpretation - should you even think about the natural justice defences. I would not attempt to justify your own actions by reference to those of others.
The fact that the case has been referred to the adjudication panel odd if, as you suggest the case is merely about raised voices. The SB can now adjourn most things to local district or county council standard's boards for adjudication - they are trying to off load wherever possible.
That said, I would agree entirely with those who say the system needs reform. It is manifestly unfair for the state to pay for a professional prosecution but offer no help with the defence...
Well, if they live in or near Sussex, I am prepared to help them as much as I can, off board. Seriously. (You have my email address Iain.)
ReplyDeleteParish councilors are generally non political, which means they do not stand for a party. (To answer Chris Paul's point) and for the most part the standards board seems to stifle talking to the electorate about their concerns.
how about saying "stuff it" and moving to Spain?
ReplyDeleteChris Paul "But there are those who hail decisions when they like them and diss them when they don't which is not on."
ReplyDeleteAnd your point is?
Do you serously hold that all decisions of the Standards Board should be regarded with approbation? Or is it just possible that the Standards Board can cock it up occasionally - as does the rest of mankind?
Good Grief!
As to 'disrespectful' - anyone care to define that term? As always it's a matter of opinion rather than fact. For example, is it 'disrespectful' to call the Standards Board a bunch of tossers? Or would it be less or more 'disrespectful' to call them deluded self-aggrandising wankers?
As has been said - Respect is earned, it is not an automatic right.
The Standards Board is not and should not be necessary. It's yet another jobs for the boys forum.
"Who are the "Standards Board" ? Are they named anywhere, what are they paid and what do they claim they have done? "
ReplyDeleteHad you thought of looking on their website? HERE
Thanks to Prentiz. Good interpretation. I am certainly not calling on anyone to admit anything they've not done. But to admit anything they have done, and apologize for offence taken at anything they were perceived to have done too.
ReplyDeleteThese things - in all walks of life - can gather a huge momentum that can be spiked by "sorry", or the lesser "sorry to have upset" etc.
In terms of the Standards Board being a subject of AC/DC attitudes ... I fully accept that they can be wrong and that the process is sometimes a bit hit and miss.
What I object to is people like Lib Dem Cllr Simon Ashley who slag the thing off and say it's worthless shit when it finds against but relies on it religiously if it finds in favour.
That's a different point to accepting fallibility.
Chris Paul said...
ReplyDelete"and apologize for offence taken at anything they were perceived to have done too."
So, if I were to take offense at your continued existence, would you apologise?
I, for my sins, was an investigator at the SBE for a while. Where does one begin?
ReplyDeleteFirstly, it is the handbags spats at the parish council level that get the attention. The inner-city councils are run better with monitoring officers to hand.
But the parish council handbags? I've seen months of preparation and interviews going into councillors who have got into spats over parking spaces, comments made in pubs off duty and the old favourite, not declaring an interest.
Honestly, does anyone give a shit?
The best/worst part is that 99.9% of the complaints that a councillor has "failed to comply with the code" come from other councillors wanting to score a party political point.
The High Court has already told the SBE in numberous cases that Convention fundamental rights trumps the code, but hey ho, let's waste a bomb going after Ken Livingstone to placate Jonathan Sachs.
Sorry dear parish councillor for the ramble/rant. The smartest councillor I came across was one who got a solicitor told us he wanted to see the full case against him, including the accuseer's interview transcripts, and gave the SBE a written witness statement rather than participating in the dodgy telephone interview.
You have trusted in the system. I hope it does not get hung round your neck.
The SBE needs to be aboloshed and all the little "highly skilled migrant antipodeans" should go and get real jobs somewhere.
AS for me, I'd always fancied the thought of getting involved in my local party and perhaps running for a council member's seat.
After working at the SBE? Not on your damn life!
We still do not know what they cost. Their website publishes no budget or costs - how can they expect others to be transparent in public service when they fail to be so themselves.
ReplyDeleteAre they cost effective - who knows
Are there platitudes - yes of course
But they dont make clear the cost of the bureacracy involved?
Thanks for everyone’s responses. My wife and I were the originators of this blog to Iain but I am sorry to say I did not know he had posted it so hadn’t seen it until today.
ReplyDeleteI don’t even know what I am allowed to say, everything is supposed to remain confidential so we are warned.
Briefly, we have certainly already said to the Standards Board Investigator that we are sorry if anything that we may have done or said caused offence to anyone, but stand by our actions and beliefs.
I can only say that we were the only two of our Parish Council who wanted openness and to represent our electorate not just ourselves.
We argued against discussing planning applications in private and insisted that the public had a right to not only know what we were doing, but to be a part of that process. We argued this, and other things as strongly as we could- clearly too forcefully for the Standards Board. We were new councillors and maybe were naive to think that everyone wanted the best for the village.We are not politicians, just a retired couple who thought they could make a difference.
We have totally cooperated with the Standards Board and have each been interviewed twice and spent countless hours preparing written responses, but as I have said, they have taken no notice of any evidence unless it is critical of us.
Although I dispute their case against us, or at worst see it as being six of one and half a dozen of the other with our opponents I am more concerned at the fact that they do not appear to even want to find the truth, or even a compromise, just to prove guilt.
Our Case has been referred to the Adjudication Panel and until we hear from them I am not entirely sure what happens next. I presume it will just be more of the same.
We have many times thought about resigning and just walking away from the whole sorry mess, and without doubt, as far as our health is concerned this would be the most sensible option.
But we keep hanging in there just because this isn’t right.
Thanks for everyone’s responses. My wife and I were the originators of this blog to Iain but I am sorry to say I did not know he had posted it so hadn’t seen it until today.
ReplyDeleteI don’t even know what I am allowed to say, everything is supposed to remain confidential so we are warned.
Briefly, we have certainly already said to the Standards Board Investigator that we are sorry if anything that we may have done or said caused offence to anyone, but stand by our actions and beliefs.
I can only say that we were the only two of our Parish Council who wanted openness and to represent our electorate not just ourselves.
We argued against discussing planning applications in private and insisted that the public had a right to not only know what we were doing, but to be a part of that process. We argued this, and other things as strongly as we could- clearly too forcefully for the Standards Board. We were new councillors and maybe were naive to think that everyone wanted the best for the village. We are not politicians, just a retired couple who were stupid enough to think they could make a difference.
We have totally cooperated with the Standards Board and have each been interviewed twice and spent countless hours preparing written responses, but as I have said, they have taken no notice of any evidence unless it is critical of us.
Although I dispute their case against us, or at worst see it as being six of one and half a dozen of the other with our opponents I am more concerned at the fact that they do not appear to even want to find the truth, or even a compromise, just to prove guilt.
Our Case has been referred to the Adjudication Panel and until we hear from them I am not entirely sure what happens next. I presume it will just be more of the same.
We have many times thought about resigning and just walking away from the whole sorry mess, and without doubt, as far as our health is concerned this would be the most sensible option.
But we keep hanging in there just because THIS ISN'T RIGHT.
we have written in twice the investigation is still on going I was not allowed extra time being ill was not a good enough reason being diagnosed with something that has meant a huge change to my lifestyle benedict white offered help if we lived in sussex can we get email exchange going ...... we do have a date for tribunal end of july 2 days well it involves people in power ..... we can get no help we were offered advice on a simple enough question at £ 75 an hour it was a very simple question can elaborate this is all taking its toll on my health and that of my husband ,,,, we have written to our m.p. .... no response or acknowledgement .......we are at our wits end ......
ReplyDelete