|
Resolution number WTM/2018/157
MOVED
by Member R Northey, seconded by Deputy Chairperson S Chambers:
That the Waitematā Local
Board:
a) provide
the following feedback on the draft Code of Conduct in Attachment of the
agenda report.
General Code of Conduct Feedback
i)
supports the overall approach towards a more
concise, positive and principle-based code of conduct
ii)
notes that the code of conduct is a set of
principles that provides elected members with guidelines for making ethical
choices in the conduct of their work and is not a legally binding contract
and on that basis does not support members being required to sign the code at
the time of inauguration
iii)
seeks the bullet point under the Respect
principle to be amended to require elected members to maintain
confidentiality of confidential information rather than the
confidentiality of all information
Complaints Process
iv)
recommends that the complaints process
includes the Chief Executive undertaking an initial assessment to determine
whether the complainant has attempted to resolve the complaint and the
complaint fits the criteria of a breach before referring to an Investigator
Conflict of Interest
v)
notes that the code proposes that alleged
breaches related to a conflict of interest will follow the process of seeking
advice from legal services or internal audit and if the elected member does
not act the matter will be referred to the Conduct Commissioner for
investigation as a material breach of the code
vi)
does not agree that a lack of action by the
elected member on internal audits advice should be automatically or usually
deemed to be a material breach. The advice may later be determined by
the Code of Conduct commissioner to be wrong
vii)
recommends that section 4.11 should be
reworded to read …referred to the Conduct Commissioner for
investigation as a potential material breach”
viii)
Notes that the conflict of interest policy has
been updated to reflect the current legal position relating to conflicts of
interest and pre-determination
ix)
consider that the pre-determination section is
too wide ranging and restrictive, for instance it should not include any
requirement to read all submissions or officers’ reports on a subject
or issue
x)
seeks the policy to confirm that campaigning
on a topic before being elected is not considered as predetermination unless
it is a central raison d’etre of their campaign
xi)
considers that the council has a role in
enabling elected members to meet their duty of registering members’
interests annually and providing a suitable platform
xii)
considers it is important that declarations
are publicly available and that if any new interests arise throughout the
year these should be added in the next annual update (as adding at the time
they arise could be an unreasonable imposition) and uploaded to a publicly
accessible registrar
xiii)
seeks for the code to be amended to reflect
the requirement for members’ interests to be uploaded immediately
following an election in addition to the requirement of completing the annual
declaration by 31 July
xiv) recommends that the language in the code is reviewed to clearly
differentiate between the process of declaring an interest and avoiding a
conflict versus having a conflict of interest
xv) recommends that sections 2.16 and 2.17 should be reworded to
reflect that having a non-financial interest need not in itself oblige the
member to act in a particular manner when the agenda item is dealt with
xvi) agrees that interests in an agenda item be declared at the start
of the meeting but that it remains up to the member to determine whether and
to what extent they participate in the item in the case of a
non-financial interest if it is merely an interest in common with the public
they can participate fully, otherwise in the case of a non-financial interest
they have an option to remain part of the meeting quorum and to have it
recorded that they neither spoke nor voted on the item
Access to information protocol
xvii) welcomes the proposed new process for providing elected members
with useful information more quickly, particularly where it can be provided
to a member in a timely manner before a meeting where the information is
relevant to a decision that is to be made there
xviii) considers that it is not appropriate for the Chief Executive to be
required to determine what is reasonably necessary as this is both an
inappropriately high test and also too subjective
xix) recommends that the access to information protocol utilises the
‘relevance test’ only as elected members have different levels of
information requirements to support their decision making. Sections 3.2 to
3.6 should be amended to retain the “good reason” principle and
the “relevant to” test but delete the “reasonably
necessary” test throughout
Media protocols
xx)
recommends that the media protocols are
revised to allow the deputy chair to speak on behalf of the chair when they
are not available
xxi)
requests that the protocols are revised to reflect
individual local board member portfolio delegations as they have the right to
be local board spokesperson in their portfolio responsibility areas.
CARRIED
|
