Monthly Archives: January 2012

by

Standards Committee (Wirral Council) 26th January 2012 Part 1 Declarations of interest, Minutes, Implications of the Localism Act on the Standards Regime


Present (part of Standards Committee)

Independent

Ken Harrison (Vice-Chair)
Alex Nuttall

Conservative

Deputy Mayor of Wirral, Cllr Gerry Ellis
Cllr Simon Mountney deputy for Cllr Les Rowlands
Cllr Chris Blakeley

Labour

Cllr Denise Roberts
Cllr John Salter
Cllr Bill Davies

Liberal Democrat

Cllr Tom Harney deputy for Cllr Pat Williams
Cllr Ann Bridson
Cllr Bob Wilkins

Officers

Shirley Hudspeth (Committee Clerk)
Surjit Tour (Legal Adviser)

Press/public

2 members of the public (John Brace and Leonora Brace)

Ken Harrison (Vice-Chair) said he was chairing the meeting tonight in the absence of the Chair Brian Cummings. Mr. Harrison told those present that Brian Cummings couldn’t make it due to “family problems” and he was indisposed. He thanked those here for attending and asked for apologies.

Apologies were given for Cllr Pat Williams, Stella Elliott and Cllr Les Rowlands.

Item 1 Members’ Code of Conduct – Declarations of Interest

Cllr Denise Roberts declared an interest in item 5 (correspondence received by the Chair) as she was named in the correspondence.

Cllr Denise Roberts declared an interest in item 4, in respect of the meeting on 6/1/2010.

Cllr Chris Blakeley asked Cllr Denise Roberts if it was item 5 she was declaring an interest in?

Surjit Tour asked Cllr Denise Roberts if it was item 5 she was declaring an interest in?

Cllr Denise Roberts confirmed it was item 5 she was declaring an interest in.

Cllr Ann Bridson declared an interest in item 5.

Surjit Tour asked if there were any more who wished to declare an interest in item 5?

Deputy Mayor Gerry Ellis apologised and said he “didn’t think”.

Cllr Ann Bridson wanted to ask legal advice on an interest matter.

Surjit Tour said that for information, it was being recommended that item 5 be dealt with as an exempt item. Therefore he said the public could not be present for item 5 and any councillors who had declared a prejudicial  interest could not be present either. Mr Tour said they could however wait in the corridor until item 5 was over, rejoin the committee after item 5 and he would explain the decision. The discussion and debate would be exempt and it was in their [the councillor's affected] interests not to take part.

Cllr Ann Bridson asked about item 4?

Cllr Denise Roberts said she had made a mistake with item 4, one referred to herself and Cllr Bridson.

Cllr Chris Blakeley said that item 5 does refer to the four women.

Cllr John Salter jokingly asked why Cllr Chris Blakeley wasn’t in here?

Cllr Simon Mountney responded to the joke by referring him to pages 66 and 67. The committee laughed.

Surjit Tour said Cllrs Roberts and Bridson both had a personal and prejudicial interest in item 5. They would therefore have to withdraw from the meeting when it was considered. He asked if the committee was happy for him to advise them in private session or open session? Would he be able to do this?

Cllr Ann Bridson asked if they would be in or out?

Surjit Tour said she would be out, then in.

The Chair said it was just like cricket and thanked Surjit Tour for his advice.

Item 2 Minutes

The Chair asked if they agreed the minutes of the meeting held on the 29th September 2011? He asked if all agreed to the above, and they said yes they did.

Item 3 Implications of the Localism Act on the Standards Regime – UPDATE

The Chair said this was on pages seven to fifty-four of the agenda.

Surjit Tour said they must be proper and thorough. He was providing an update on the implications of the Localism Act 2011 which had implications for the standards regime, Members’ Code of Conduct and Standards Committee. The changes happening from 1st July 2012 as mentioned in 4.3, were outlined in an explanatory note giving an indication of the timetable. The original date of 1st April 2012 had been changed to 1st July 2012, which gave a greater lead in time.

There would be further guidance from the Department of Communities and Local Government about the pecuniary interest which was difficult to explain. Appendix 2 had a new draft Code of Conduct. Put together with the national changes, it would be used as a basis to invite discussion and debate with the new Code being adopted.

Mr Tour said it was coming in across Merseyside and would hopefully be easier to administer. Appendix 2 contained a draft Code of Conduct to consider. The report also recommended to set up a Working Group to allow further discussion on the new amendments. The new regime would come into effect as of the 1st July 2012. Paragraph 4.10 summarises the key areas.

Mr Tour continued by stating there was no longer a requirement under the Act to have a Standards Committee. However, in order to administer arrangements it was a helpful vehicle. There was no obligation to have a Members Code, but they did have to have a new Members Code of Conduct which would be a requirement. The new role for independent persons was different to Independent Members. The nature of the role, description and approval would require amendment. They had to have at least one independent person.

This person would be consulted. There would still be a requirement on those covered by the Code to keep the Register of Interests up to date. It would be to the discretion of the Committee, as to the procedure regarding conduct matters. He then explained about dispensations (once they existed) and the protocol (in the unlikely event) that a matter should be referred to the police.

The new rules covered eight critical areas. Before 1st July 2011 as outlined at 4.11 they needed to set up a Working Group. The terms of reference were outlined at 3.1. Mr. Tour finally asked if there were any other items or issues?

The Chair asked if there were any items he wanted to draw attention to?

Surjit Tour said on page twelve there were various points in the explanatory note. S. 27 placed a duty on Wirral Council to promote and maintain high standards of conduct on Wirral Council. The other thing was the issue of sanctions. There were issues regarding decisions made outside of jurisdiction. The advice obtained may be considered.

A formal letter or censure was fine. Removal was limited as sanctions were up to political groups and not a sanction that could be imposed. Press releases and publicity was not an issue. There was no longer a reference to a special obligation not to publish and it would be to their discretion as to whether confidentiality still extended to the matter.

On the issue of allowances it was doubtful as to whether these could be withheld as it would be deemed to be unlawful. Even if an allegation related to access to confidential information, further access to confidential information by councillors couldn’t be restricted.

The appointment of the independent person could cause some difficulty due to the legal restrictions on conflicts of interest. This Surjit Tour felt would lead to a loss of knowledge and experience. He reiterated that an independent person was different to an Independent Member.

Cllr Chris Blakeley said it would have to commence by the 1st July. He said it was an awful lot of change. A lot of councillors and Members couldn’t understand the current system. Therefore it was difficult for people to comply, he realised however that ignorance wasn’t a reason. He felt that if they go down that route with a draft Code of Conduct, they had to get the message across to councillors and Members. His personal view was that although they don’t have to have a Standards Committee, was that it was easier to continue with the Code and just transpose the old one to the new one. It had served them well for four years, the difference being was that the sanctions would come out. It was just a suggestion.

Surjit Tour said it was at their discretion but there were some changes as the ten principles had been reduced to seven. There was no reason why they couldn’t adopt the old Code of Conduct as the new Code of Conduct.

Cllr John Salter said that they would have to have training on it between now and July to highlight this, he thought training would only take a couple of hours.

Cllr Bill Davies said he had been on a lot of subcommittees, when members of the committee were ill they sent deputies, it meant the deputies needed training too. Another idea was to exchange with other councils, but he did feel deputies should be included in the training.

The Chair said it was essential especially in the spirit of the matter. In his view training was very important. Anyone sitting or deputising must be trained.

Cllr Ann Bridson said to bring them down to earth she had spotted some misprints.

On page 9, in 4.11 “4.8” should read “4.10“.

On page 22, the first principle was “SELFISHNESS” but this should read “SELFLESSNESS“.

The Chair joked and said it was “not really a mistake”.

Cllr Bridson said adding to what other people have said, she wanted to look at what we’ve got and went on to make a point about training for everyone and deputies.

Cllr John Salter said he encouraged everyone in the Council to have training.

Cllr Ann Bridson said that “everyone should know their limitations”.

Cllr John Salter said they could swap with Liverpool City Council.

Cllr Chris Blakeley said he would prefer it to be pan-Merseyside rather than twelve here, twelve in Liverpool, five authorities, two of them with fifteen person committees. He said it would bring consistency.

The Chair said it was in the pipeline.

Related articles
About these ads
by

Cabinet (Wirral Council) 12th January 2012 Any Other Business – Urgent Business Approved by the Chair (Part 1) – Independent Review of Claims Made by Martin Morton (and others) Part 4


Jim Wilkie, Chief Executive said he would make some very brief comments and did about the Anna Klonowski report and the other summaries attached.

Cllr Steve Foulkes said it was a “damning report”. He hoped the members of the public could understand why there had been an elongation of the Right to Reply to allow the process to take place. He believed the way matters had been dealt with had clearly not been appropriate. He thanked the former Leader, Cllr Jeff Green.

Cllr Foulkes said it was fully costed and they would continue to engage [AKA Ltd] for the foreseeable period. He saw it continuing going forward to the next available Cabinet meeting. He felt it need to be discussed in full and with other whistleblowing issues.

The Highways and Engineering Services Procurement Exercise report was discussed by Cllr Foulkes in detail. He said the main accusations were people being overcharged and compensation as well as other forms of abuse. Cllr Foulkes said they had been investigated and reported to the police.

Cllr Foulkes mentioned detailed work on the Action Plan and how to “move forward”. He said the view to the outside world was one of reputational damage to Wirral Council. They were engaging an external body to help and advise which would hopefully counter the insular culture.

He referred to a Corporate Governance Committee briefing and the “Improvement Board” which would include North West Employers to hold them [Wirral Council] to account. The Chief Executive and Bill Norman would keep an overview on how they dealt with the Action Plan. He mentioned hope and prayer and picking up comments by employees.

There was outrage and outrage by individuals and harm to individuals. He gave a public apology to Martin Morton which was a “genuine case” that Wirral Council had “not dealt with appropriately”. The Audit and Risk Management Committee had had a time of reflection, but should now move forward with a final resolution.

Graham Hodkinson was now Director of Adult Social Services and he welcomed him to his new post. He then read out the following resolution verbatim that was also handed out to those present. He said an apology to Martin Morton had been added. He wanted discussions to continue with Martin Morton to ensure an “amicable outcome” and a job with the authority. However they had to tie the loose ends up and it was not for Cllr Foulkes or the Cabinet to speak on behalf of Martin Morton.

He said it was the final outcome and that it helps the audience. He said it was a “difficult report to read”. He had tried to give encouragement to people working in the Department for Adult Social Services, but that it can’t go without thorough investigation.

Cllr Phil Davies formally seconded the resolution. It was agreed by the Cabinet. The resolution is below.

On a Motion moved by Councillor S Foulkes and seconded by Councillor P Davies it was

RESOLVED (unanimously): That

(1)       the Exempt Appendices 2 and 4 be brought into the public domain;

(2)       the previous Council Leader, Councillor J Green be thanked for engaging AKA to investigate the claims of Mr Martin Morton (and others);

(3)       the Council apologises to Mr Martin Morton and discussions will continue with him in the hope that an amicable outcome is reached; and

(4)       this Cabinet recognises the serious failings contained within this report and the harm done to vulnerable adults as a consequence of those failings.

It accepts unreservedly the recommendations made in the report and asks the Chief Executive to draw up an Action Plan demonstrating how those recommendations will be implemented, which should be reported back to the next Cabinet, and referred from there to a Special Council for full debate.

Cabinet welcomes the fact that the Chief Executive has already asked:

§ The Director of Adult Social Services, supported by the Head of Safeguarding, to urgently review the Final report for any further safeguarding issues that need to be addressed

§ The Director of Law, HR and Asset Management, supported by the Head of Human Resources and Organisational Development, to urgently review the Final Report to ensure all appropriate action is taken,

§ The Director of Law, HR and Asset Management, in consultation with the Director of Adult Social Services and the Head of Safeguarding, to urgently review the Final Report to consider whether any historic safeguarding failures should be referred to the Police, (or any relevant regulatory body) for investigation.

It further notes the actions already under way listed in paragraphs 3.8 to 3.10 which include:

§ A series of measures to strengthen the Council’s  safeguarding of vulnerable adults

§ An ongoing review into the Council’s whistle blowing and harassment and bullying policies and

§ A wider review of the Council’s Corporate Governance (including a review of all fees and charges)

And notes that these measures are designed to ensure that the situations contained within the report could not be repeated in the Department of Adult Social Services or elsewhere across the Council.

Cabinet is also conscious of the fact that one of the criticisms in the report is that in Wirral Council the “abnormal has become normal”.

Cabinet therefore endorses the decision of the Leader of the Council to set up an Improvement Board, under the umbrella of the LGA, with external representatives from the LGA and elsewhere, including the author of this report, Ms Anna Klonowski, to ensure that any future decisions are taken on the basis of best practice rather than accepted Wirral practice.

Cabinet further endorses the decision to refer the Action Plan to be drawn up by the Chief Executive to this Improvement board for their Scrutiny and comment.

Cabinet also refers the Final Report to the Health and Well Being Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their Scrutiny and Comments.

Cabinet believes that this Final Report should be seen in tandem with the Martin Smith report into allegations of bullying and harassment and therefore believes it would be in the public interest to publish this report,  and refer it to the Special Council called to discuss the Final Anna Klonowski’s report, along with a separate report on HESPE which also arose from the actions of Whistleblowers and the Council’s response to those Whistleblowers.

Cabinet thanks Ms Klonowski for the detailed work that has gone into this Final Report and expresses its hope and belief that these findings can be used as a catalyst for major improvement and change.

It further hopes that this will allow the Council to move forward from this point to the provision of radically improved services and a much more open and transparent culture which welcomes and learns from criticism and responds rapidly to complaints or concerns at the earliest possible stage, preventing a situation like this from ever arising again.

by

Cabinet 12th January 2012 Declarations of Interest, Minutes (8/12/11) & objections (12/12/11), AOB – Urgent Business Approved by the Chair (Part 1) – Independent Review of Claims Made by Martin Morton (and others) Part 3


Bearing in mind the previous interests I have mentioned in this matter I will try to write this up in as fair a way as possible!

Present:
All Cabinet Members

Cllr Steve Foulkes started the meeting by saying “What a day!” He wished people present a good evening and said he was changing the agenda because of a serious issue to do with the AK report, which was supplementary agenda one, item 24. First however the Committee had to deal with declarations of interests.

Cllr George Davies declared a personal interest in item 7 due to his wife’s employment as a primary school teacher.
Cllr George Davies declared a prejudicial interest in item 7 due to his wife’s employment as a primary school teacher.
Cllr Chris Meaden declared an interest in item 13 due to being a Non Executive Director of Lairdside Communities Together.
Cllr Phil Davies declared a personal interest in item 13 due to being a Non Executive Director of Lairdside Communities Together.

Cllr Steve Foulkes asked if they could move on and agree the minutes of the meeting held on the 8th December 2011. The minutes were agreed and the four successful objections to the minutes on the 12th December 2011 were noted.

Cllr Steve Foulkes said he had quite a rewarding day at Hulme Hall. Five people including himself as Leader as well as the Deputy Leader & Chief Executive had been present for matters involving corporate governance, public health and child poverty. He said they had dealt with two thousand employees. He wanted to “get every employee up to speed” but his “voice may go”.

With regards to Agenda Item 24, the independent review, they had been requested and thought it also sensible to bring the Martin Smith report about bullying. An Executive Summary was already in the public domain but he had asked Bill Norman to make it available and to the future full Council meeting.

Bill Norman said the report had been received to a previous Cabinet meeting in April 2011. The report had been exempt because Wirral Council had to consider disciplinary issues. This reason for the exemption no longer continues. There was an exempt appendix three involving North West Employers which for some reasons they’d prefer not to disclose they needed to ensure the version circulated is redacted and anonymised. It was in his opinion in the public interest to disclose.

Cllr Steve Foulkes used the words “anxious”, “complicated” and “accusations”. He expressed the view that they had held onto it longer than they need to. He said councillors had seen the original version and it was part of the same issue. He wanted it in the public arena sooner rather than later. The Martin Smith report would be considered in the public domain. He referred to the full Council meeting.

Bill Norman said with regards to exempt appendix 4, the letters from the Standards for England to four Wirral councillors, he had spoken to the four councillors. All four councillors had said they would prefer the decision notices to be made public and agreed to it being in the public domain.

Related articles
by

Cabinet 12th January 2012 AOB – Urgent Business Approved by the Chair (Part 1) – Independent Review of Claims Made by Martin Morton (and others) Part 2


Before I write this up, I need to (to be ethical) state a raft of conflicts of interest as I have been overcharged by Wirral Council’s Social Services in the past in the time period around 2004-2005. However the money has since been refunded to me.

There are further many conflicts of interest I now have and to be ethical have to declare (what I can) about two of the four councillors named in the decision notices.

1) I am now a member of the Birkenhead Liberal Democrats and so are Cllrs Ann Bridson and Cllrs Pat Williams.
2) I have previously been a member of the Birkenhead Liberal Democrats and have are Cllrs Ann Bridson and Cllrs Pat Williams.
3) I am now a member of the North West Liberal Democrats and so are Cllrs Ann Bridson and Cllrs Pat Williams.
4) I have previously been a member of the North West Liberal Democrats and so have Cllrs Ann Bridson and Cllrs Pat Williams.
5) I am now a member of the Liberal Democrats and so are Cllrs Ann Bridson and Cllrs Pat Williams.
6) I have previously been a member of the Liberal Democrats and so have Cllrs Ann Bridson and Cllrs Pat Williams.
7) I have previously been a member of the Wirral West Liberal Democrats and so has Cllr Ann Bridson.
8) Although, not at the time of writing I have in the past been elected as a political party office holder for both the Birkenhead Local Party and Wirral West Liberal Democrats at the same time as Cllrs Ann Bridson with respect to Birkenhead and Wirral West and Cllrs Pat Williams with respect to Birkenhead. These positions were:-

a) past office holder of the Birkenhead Liberal Democrat Constituency Executive at the same time as Cllrs Bridson and Cllrs Williams
b) past office holder as Federal Conference representative (Birkenhead Local Party) at the same time as Cllrs Bridson and Cllrs Williams
c) past office holder as North West regional conference representative (Birkenhead Local Party) at the same time as Cllr Bridson
d) past office holder as North West regional conference representative (Wirral West Local Party) at the same time as Cllr Bridson

I am also have two further undisclosed interests of Cllr Bridson and one of Cllr Williams. I’m not willing at this point to declare what these are, just to state they exist. I have delayed writing this report of the Cabinet due to the need to read the report and appendices which total 529 pages.  The following documents were published on Wirral Council’s website for this agenda item.

Report of Chief Executive (14 A4 pages)

Appendix 1 AKA Final Report (249 A4 pages)

Appendix 2 Martin Smith report by North West Employers into claims made by Martin Morton (276 pages)

Appendix 4A (Standards for England Decision Notice) Cllr Pat Williams (1 A4 page)

Appendix 4B (Standards for England Decision Notice) Cllr Moira McLaughlin (1 A4 page)

Appendix 4C (Standards for England Decision Notice) Cllr Denise Roberts (1 A4 page)

Appendix 4D (Standards for England Decision Notice) Cllr Ann Bridson (1 A4 page)

There are also the draft minutes are on Wirral Council’s website. There is also more information that has been known to us for some time in this matter which involves some of the Appendices to the AKA Final Report.

I have previously written about Appendix 9 here.

by

Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee (Wirral Council) 23/1/2012 Part 3


Nouormand: Êlections au mais d'Octobre 2008, Jèrri

Image via Wikipedia

Kate said they had visited the Masonic Hall this afternoon and it was a suitable venue. It cost £350 for hire. Surjit Tour talked about Between2Worlds. He said there were statutory purposes for polling stations and the front entrance at the Masonic Hall was unsuitable for disabled access. However there was no certainty for hire costs with Between2Worlds as it would have to be negotiated.

Cllr Ian Lewis commented. He understood the point made by Cllr Darren Dodd, his concern was that they were looking at maps whereas in practice it was the effect on votes. Wherever it moved, people wouldn’t vote as they’d go to the wrong polling station as it had previously been the YMCA. He said elderly people who had used the YMCA might not find out as not everyone was sent a polling card. He said his personal preference was to accept the Masonic Hall as opposed to the YMCA car park.

Cllr Patricia Glasman said he agreed with Cllr Ian Lewis on the whole, she also wanted the Masonic Lodge, however there was no provision for tellers.

Kate said that other polling stations that were entered directly had no provision and tellers could remain outside.

Cllr Bill Davies asked about the disabled access.

Kate said yes in answer to his question. There was a side exit at the Masonic Lodge used as a fire exit, unfortunately a ramp over the front steps was not practical.

Cllr Chris Jones asked about the past history of problems about using a Masonic Lodge as a polling station.

Cllr Bill Davies said he didn’t have the details in front of his, but to his recollection each time Masonic Lodges had been proposed as polling stations it had been turned down.

Cllr Ian Lewis said it would be nice if polling stations were suitable for tellers and wouldn’t inconvenience political activists. He still saw the Masonic Lodge as the least inconvenient.

Cllr Steve Niblock proposed, seconded by Cllr Chris Jones that the polling station for WE.

Cllr Sue Taylor proposed and Cllr Kate Wood seconded that the Masonic Lodge be used as the polling station for polling district WE.

There was a vote first on the amendment.

For: Cllrs Taylor, Wood, Lewis, Anderson and Glasman (5)
Against: Cllrs Davies, Williams, Niblock and Jones (4)

Abstention: None (0)

The amendment was carried by one vote (5:4:0).

The Chair said if possible because of the time scale, could they make a decision quickly on alternative polling stations?

Cllr Steve Niblock said there was a fall back of Between2Worlds, but he was happy if it was agreed by the party spokespersons.

Cllr Bill Davies said he wanted to advise the committee that with the timing of the local elections, if possible could it wait till March? Cllr Bill Davies proposed and Cllr Sue Taylor seconded that if alternative polling stations needed to be found that it would be agreed by the spokespersons.

This was agreed by the Committee.

by

Licensing, Health and Safety and General Purposes Committee (Wirral Council) 23/1/2012 Part 2


Present:

Conservative

Cllr Kate Wood
Cllr Sue Taylor
Cllr Ian Lewis
Cllr Tom Anderson

Labour

Cllr Bill Davies (Chair)
Cllr Irene Williams
Cllr Steve Niblock
Cllr Chris Jones
Cllr Patricia Glasman

Lib Dem

Absent

Cllr Bill Davies said he would make a start to the meeting and deal with the polling stations and Wirral award first. He asked for any declarations of interest.

Cllr Steve Niblock declared a personal interest in item 5 as he knew the nominees and one of those nominated

Cllr Ian Lewis declared a personal interest in item 3 as he is a councillor for Leasowe and Moreton East specifically in relation to polling district TC

Cllr Ian Lewis also declared a personal interest in item 5 as two of the nominees were known to him.

Cllr Patricia Glasman declared a personal interest in item 3 as it mentions New Brighton ward.

Cllr Sue Taylor declared a personal interest in item 3 as it mentions New Brighton ward.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 10th November 2011 were agreed.

Cllr Chris Jones said she wanted to declare an interest, she declared a personal interest as she is a councillor in Seacombe ward.
Cllr Patricia Glasman declared an interest in item 5 as she knew one of the nominees.

The Committee then considered the report on Polling Districts and Polling Places. Surjit Tour said it was an update to the polling stations, which has been reviewed. Issues had been raised with polling districts WE and TC as they had required further work. The options related to the work.

For polling district TC the current polling place was Sacred Heart RC Primary School. Yew Tree Online Centre had been suggested as an alternative. Yew Tree Online Centre had previously been classed as unsuitable, however it had moved on and was now a suitable venue.

In Liscard ward, polling district WD Between2Worlds was an option or the YMCA. There were other alternative options that had been looked into too such as the Masonic Hall or Liscard Primary School.

The Chair said the panel had met on Friday and got feedback from ward councillors regarding the Yew Tree online centre.

Kate said they had received no feedback over the Yew Tree Online Centre, but Cllr Darren Dodd had sent them correspondence about Between2Worlds. Cllr Keeley wished to speak on this issue.

Cllr Steve Williams proposed that they agree the Yew Tree Online Centre as the polling station for polling district TC (Leasowe and Moreton East Ward). This was seconded by Cllr Patricia Glasman. All nine councillors voted in favour.

Cllr Keeley said he wanted to be brief, he was disappointed and felt that the polling station should be in the polling district. They had lost the YMCA which was a “crying shame”. He wanted a location that was good for drivers and on a bus route. As much as possible he wanted the committee to find a polling station as close as possible. He suggested the option of the Masonic Hall as it had a bus stop outside and a large car park.

The Chair thanked him for his comments.

Related articles
by

Standards Hearing Panel 24/1/2012 Denis Knowles Part 4


When Denis Knowles, Rosemary Lyons and the public returned the Chair thanked them. He said after “careful consideration” and receiving legal advice they had reached a decision.

Stella Elliott said that had carefully listened to the representations by Denis Knowles, but it was the final view that counts. She said it was “unacceptable” and they are thankful. In regards to respect, disrepute and the equality enactments. They had noted he had undergone training and his contrition. He had learned his lesson and they also took on board his prompt actions and self-reform as well as his full cooperation.

The panel had decided not to sanction him.

The Chair thanked the panel, officers and others and closed the meeting.

Related articles
by

Standards Hearing Panel 24/1/2012 Denis Knowles Part 3


Continued from Standards Hearing Panel 24/1/2012 Denis Knowles Part 2

The Chair asked him if he had any other questions?

Denis Knowles said he had no questions as the report was mostly clear and accurate, he was happy to accept its findings apart from the minor issue.

The Chair said that was gracious. He pointed out that the Code of Conduct covered blogging, but he was not going to discuss potential remedies or people’s private capacity as there was a dividing line there.

Denis Knowles said he was grateful. The Chair thanked Denis Knowles. He asked Cllr Les Rowlands if he had any questions. Cllr Les Rowlands said no. He asked Stella Elliott if she had any questions. Stella Elliott said no. He asked Cllr Bill Davies if he had any questions. Cllr Bill Davies said no.

The Chair asked Denis Knowles if he had any other representations he wished to make?

Denis Knowles said “no, not really”, he said he had made an error of judgement and posted an apology and referred himself to the Standards Committee. He said he was horrified to think that he could cause offence and that it would bring the Council into disrepute, which was what he feared most. He had mixed with the people who were offended and he could see their views, he had even made some very good friends with people he would not normally associate with. It had been a political off the cuff jibe which was apparently offensive. Since it had happened he had received supportive emails which outweighed the people who had been offended. If he had offended one person it was bad enough. He had jumped the gun and done the right thing.

The Chair mentioned that Denis Knowles had been on diversity training and a course, he was willingly contrite and he felt he had learnt. He said his actions may or may not be different next time.

Denis Knowles said he had learnt by his mistake, which was not always easy. He had been suspended by the Conservative Party straight away, which was a political act, this had to led to him being “taken away”. He had learnt a huge lesson and hopefully would stand as a candidate for councillor again. If people never made mistakes they would be God-like. He was humble enough to accept and learn thing. The day people knew everything they would be in heaven.

Cllr Patricia Williams asked Denis Knowles what he hoped the outcome would be?

Denis Knowles said he hoped they realised he accepts the guilt and would accept any advice over his future conduct. It had been over his head for nearly two years and was a “black cloud” for so long. It was stressful for him but he had his head held high. He looked forward to the judgement and expected to be set on the right path.

At this point the Standards Review Panel asked Denis Knowles, Rosemary Lyon and the public to leave, but return when they had made a decision.

Continue to Standards Hearing Panel 24/1/2012 Denis Knowles Part 4

by

Standards Hearing Panel 24/1/2012 Denis Knowles Part 2


Continued from Standards Hearing Panel 24th January 2012 Member complained about: Denis Knowles Complainant: Denis Knowles Part 1

Present:

Standards Hearing Panel (5)

The Standards Hearing Panel
Independent Members
Mr. Ken Harrison (Chair)
Mrs Stella Elliott (Vice-Chair)
Councillors
Conservative
Cllr L Rowlands
Labour
Cllr B Davies
Liberal Democrat
Cllr P Williams

Wirral Council Officers
Surjit Tour, (Head of Legal and Member Services) representing Monitoring Officer (Bill Norman)
Shirley Hudspeth, Panel Clerk (Democratic Services Manager)
Rosemary Lyon, Investigating Officer

Subject of complaint
Denis Knowles, person complained about

Public/Press
John Brace (press)
Leonora Brace

The Chair asked for any declarations of interest. Cllr Les Rowlands declared an interest as he was a member of the Conservative Party and so was the person complained about. He asked for advice about if it was a prejudicial interest.

Surjit Tour said that Cllr Les Rowlands was there representing his political group.

The Chair agreed that the meeting was quorate. He said they would decide not to exclude the public from proceedings. He asked for a summary of the report.

Rosemary Lyons said she had been asked by the Monitoring Officer (Bill Norman) on a self-referred complaint which related to a comment on the Facebook site. She said Members had to comply with the Code of Conduct, if they claimed to act as a representative of the Authority or certain other types of business. She referred to Standards Board for England guidance, a copy of which was provided as appendix 2 to the report. The guidance was on blogging and social networking.

She realised that the Member meant no gratuitous offense by the comment and the timing of the comment was on the 27th March 2010. She had interviewed Cllr Knowles. She said that Cllr Knowles had put details of his councillor’s surgeries on his Facebook site. She said he had been completely honest and helpful. In conclusion she said it was in reference to leaflets delivered in Seacombe ward and could amount to a personal jibe due to the use of the phrase “limp wristed”. The relevant paragraphs of the Code were on respect, conduct bringing the Authority into disrepute, there was also a subset that said Members mustn’t do anything that could breach the Equality Act 2010. She mentioned the local elections in Seacombe ward in 2010 and said that it could be argued that Denis Knowles was acting in his capacity as a Member. She said he was quick to alert and the emails in appendix 2 set out the self referral. He had undergone training and activities, which he had not had before making the comments. Denis Knowles had accepted the findings of the draft report.

The Panel had to decide whether there had been a failure or not been a failure. She said there had been substantial mitigation in the form of an apology and removing the comment, she was happy to ask any questions?

Denis Knowles said he had no questions and had been as open and honest as he could be. He said he had been unaware of the Code of Conduct. He said the claim that he had surgery dates on the Facebook site was untrue. He said on second thoughts he realised his surgery dates were on the WordPress site and on the Wirral Council website. On reflection they had not been on Facebook. It was clear to him that Facebook was not being used by him for political purposes but for social purposes.

He said the WordPress blog was outside the jurisdiction of the complaint covered by the Panel. He said this dispute over whether the Facebook site had his councillor’s surgery details on was the only disagreement he had with the report.

Continue to Standards Hearing Panel 24/1/2012 Denis Knowles Part 3

by

Standards Hearing Panel 24th January 2012 Member complained about: Denis Knowles Complainant: Denis Knowles Part 1


Documents for Standards Hearing Panel meeting into complaint about Mr. Denis Knowles.

Agenda
Page 1 of 1

Standards Hearing Panel

Date: Tuesday, 24 January 2012
Time: 9.30 am

Venue: Committee Room 3 – Wallasey Town Hall

Contact Officer: Shirley Hudspeth
Tel: 0151 691 8559
e-mail: shirleyhudspeth@wirral.gov.uk
Website:

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————

AGENDA
1. MEMBERS’ CODE OF CONDUCT – DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members of the Panel are invited to consider whether they have a personal or prejudicial interest in connection with any of the items of business on the agenda and, if so, declare it and state the nature of such interest.

2. EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC
RECOMMENDATION:
That, under section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined by the relevant paragraphs of Part I of Schedule 12A to that Act. The Public Interest test has been applied and favours exclusion at this time, however, the Panel will consider the continuation of the exclusion at the meeting.

3. COMPLAINT AGAINST A MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL (Pages 1 - 24)
To hear and make a determination on allegation that a Member of the
Council has failed to comply with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 1 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 1 of 7
Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 2 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 2 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 3 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 3 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 4 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 4 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 5 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 5 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 6 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 6 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 7 of 7

Agenda Item 3 Report of the Monitoring Officer Page 7 of 7

Appendix 1 (7 pages)

Standards for England guidance on blogging (online version)

Page 1

Appendix 2 Page 1 of 2 Email from Marianne Duncan on behalf of Bill Norman to Rosemary A Lyon (16/9/2010 13:43) and email from Cllr Denis T Knowles to Bill D Norman (30/3/2010 17:48)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION Page 1 of 1

Appendix 2 TO INVESTIGATING OFFICER’S REPORT

Lyon, Rosemary A.
——————————-
From: Duncan, Marianne on behalf of Norman, Bill D.
Sent: 16 September 2010 13:43
To: Lyon, Rosemary A
Subject: FW: Code of conduct
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential

——————————-
From: Knowles, Denis T. (Councillor)
Sent: 30 March 2010 17:48
To: Norman, Bill, D.
Subject: Code of conduct
Importance: High
Sensitivity: Confidential

Hi Bill,

I am truly appalled and horrified to have possibly brought the council into disrepute by something that I have posted on a social network site and for my own piece of mind I would like to give you notification that I intend to report myself to the Standards Committee for investigation.

I will email you my official request in the morning.

Yours sincerely,

Denis

Councillor Denis Knowles
Conservative Councillor for Seacombe Ward
Wirral Borough Council
Tel: 0151 639 7104
Mob: 07796 684428
Email: denisknowles@wirral.gov.uk
Blog: http://www.seacombe.info

http://twitter.com/Mervira

16/9/10 Page 24

Page 2

Appendix 2 Page 2 of 2 Email from Marianne Duncan on behalf of Bill Norman to Rosemary A Lyon (16/9/2010 13:44) and email from Cllr Denis T Knowles to Bill D Norman (31/3/2010 16:32)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Lyon, Rosemary A.
——————————-
From: Duncan, Marianne on behalf of Norman, Bill D.
Sent: 16 September 2010 13:44
To: Lyon, Rosemary A
Subject: FW: request

——————————-
From: Knowles, Denis T. (Councillor)
Sent: 31 March 2010 16:32
To: Norman, Bill, D.
Subject: request

Dear Mr. Norman,

You will probably be aware of the furore surrounding a comment I made on my Facebook site which, to my total dismay, appears to have spiralled out of all proportion. I removed said comment immediately as soon as I became aware that it could be construed as offensive.

I also immediately posted an apology for any distress I may have caused. You will also be aware that I have been suspended locally by my political party, pending an investigation.

I feel that it is important to protect myself and Wirral Council from any breeches of the code we work to and specifically in relation to equality matters, which my lapse might bring to and a charge of disrepute against me.

I would therefore ask you to accept my request to report myself to the Councils Standards Committee for assessment. I will gladly submit myself to the Committee for advice and support in this matter including a willingness to undergo further training, if required, to help alleviate any further embarrassment or lapses on my part.

I sincerely regret the undesirable bad publicity that has accrued to date in connection with my comments.

Yours sincerely,

Councillor Denis Knowles
Councillor for Seacombe Ward
Wirral Borough Council
Tel: 0151 639 7104
Mob: 07796 684428

16/9/10 Page 24