Agenda item

To consider the Member motion relating to the Nolan Principles as proposed by Councillor Pavitt.

Councillor Pavitt presented his motion on the Nolan Principles. He proposed as follows:

 

Whereas it is noted that there has been some ambiguity over institutional and personal commitment to the Nolan principles as a result of conflation with other matters,

 

We, the undersigned, note that the Nolan Principles underpin all actions of this Council and our actions, in the public interest, as individuals. This Council reaffirms its commitment to the seven Nolan Principles of Public Life - Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty and Leadership.

 

He said the motion was simple and clear, and urged members to support this proposal rather than the amendment.

 

Councillor Tayler seconded the motion and said he was doing so to build respect and trust between groups and to reaffirm Council’s commitment to the Nolan principles. He said the previous motion, considered at Council on 8 December, that had been rejected at Council, which some had purported was a rejection of the Nolan Principles, had been rejected due to the crux of the motion itself, which related to a specific matter.

 

Councillor Khan said he was surprised by the “Damascene Conversion” in the Members support for the Nolan Principles.

 

Councillor Pavitt raised a point of personal clarification; he said he had not voted against the Nolan Principles.

 

Councillor Khan asked Members to show integrity and vote for the amendment.

 

Councillor Isham said it was strange to reaffirm principles to which all councillors were duty bound; all members were in support of the Nolan Principles.

 

Councillor Asker said this situation could have been avoided if the previous motion’s clauses had been taken as a separate vote and this guidance should have been provided to the Chair.

 

Councillor Sell had given notice of an amendment and proposed as follows:

 

 Whereas it is noted that there has been some ambiguity over institutional and personal commitment to the Nolan principles as a result of conflation with other matters.

 

We, the undersigned, note that the Nolan Principles underpin all actions of this Council and our actions, in the public interest, as individuals.

This Council therefore reaffirms its commitment to the seven Nolan Principles of Public Life – Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty and Leadership.

 

We therefore acknowledge and recognise our obligations in terms of these principles to hold ourselves to full and open scrutiny, and to stand up to and report all actions or omissions by our colleagues and elements of our council that appear reasonably to contradict these principles.

 

Councillor Sell said he was looking to build a consensus with his amendment, and it was by no means opportunistic.

 

Councillor Dean seconded the amendment.

 

Councillor Hargreaves asked members to vote down the amendment. He said it was looking to amend the Code of Conduct to incorporate the Principles. This had been discussed in 2017 by the Standards Committee and they had decided against incorporating the principles, as they lacked definition and could lead to a political mechanism which could be used against Members in a potentially vexatious way. Furthermore, he said that Councillor Dean had abstained from voting for this very reason at the meeting in 2017. He used the example of ‘leadership’ to demonstrate the subjective nature of the principles and to warn of the dangers of incorporating them into the Code of Conduct.

 

Councillor Gregory agreed and said this would open the door to vexatious complaints. He would not support the amendment. He added that the issue with the previous motion was that it compounded the Nolan Principles with a procedural motion which he could not have supported as a whole.

 

Councillor Barker said she tried to live her life well, and adhered to the Nolan Principles regardless of her role as councillor. She said she had signed up the amendment as she did not understand the introduction to the substantive motion. She said there was no ambiguity in relation to the Nolan principles.

 

Councillor Freeman said he could not support the amendment as it would open the door to vexatious complaints, which would be anti-democratic.

 

Councillor Light said councillors had failed to understand that action speaks louder than words and urged members to vote for the amendment and to act in accordance with the Nolan Principles.

 

Councillor Caton said he was appalled by the behaviour of Council and said he would vote against the proposals.

 

Councillor Fairhurst said the motion itself was an amendment and that all would affirm their commitment to the Nolan Principles. The difference between Members were down to different interpretations of the principles. He said the motion on 8 December had called for action in relation to matters that directly related to the principles; he said the motion was not conflated, it was about following up commitments to the principles with actual deeds.

 

The Chair adjourned the meeting for a comfort break at 9.10pm.

 

The meeting was reconvened at 9.15pm.

 

Councillor Dean said the amendment set out Members’ individual obligations; if Members voted this down, they would be dismissing their obligations. He said he had re-joined the Standards Committee as commitments had been made to regularise the standards process. He said he hoped Members supported the amendment as it set out what the Council would do.

 

Councillor Reeve proposed that the question now be put.

 

Councillor Freeman seconded.

 

There was no dissent.

 

Councillor Pavitt summarised following comments made on the amendment. He said it was clear that no one was arguing against the Nolan Principles but he was worried about the amendment as it proposed to introduce a change in how the Council approached Standards matters. He said you could not decide to change the rules on the spur of the moment; if there was a real desire for change, proposals should be considered by the Standards Committee before being brought back to Council. He asked members to vote against the amendment.

 

Councillro Light requested a recorded vote on the amendment.

 

The Chair moved to a vote on the amendment.

 

 

Councillor:	For, Against or Abstain
Armstrong	Against
Asker	Against
Bagnall	Against
Barker	For
Caton	For
Coote	Against
Day	Against
De Vries	Against
Dean	For
Driscoll	Against
Eke	Against
Evans	Against
Fairhurst	For
Foley	Abstain
Freeman	Against
Gregory	Against
Hargreaves	Against
Isham	For
Jones	Against
Khan	For
Lavelle	Against
LeCount	Against
Lees	Against
Lemon	For
Light	For
Lodge	Against
Loughlin	For
Luck	Against
Merifield	Against
Oliver	For
Pavitt	Against
Pepper	Against
Reeve	Against
Sell	For
Sutton	Against
Tayler	Against

 

The amendment fell, 11 for, 24 against and 1 abstention.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Light, the Chief Executive clarified the rule relating to the 12.9.2 that gave the mover of the motion the right of reply at the end of the debate.

 

Councillor Barker raised a point of order relating to Councillor Coote’s comments. She asked that the protocol be adhered to.

 

The debate returned to the substantive motion.

 

The Chair asked the Democratic Services Manager to read out Councillor Criscione’s statement, as he had been unable to attend the reconvened meeting.

 

The Democratic Services Manager said he had received an email from Councillor Criscione stating his points had been adequately made at the meeting and that the statement did not need to be read.

 

Councillor Lees proposed that the substantive motion now be put to vote.

 

Councillor Driscoll seconded.

 

The Chair moved to a vote that the question now be put. The proposal was carried 18 for, 16 against and 2 abstentions.

 

Councillor Fairhurst asked Members to vote in support of the substantive motion, regardless of whether they had previously supported the amendment.

 

Councillor Pavitt said he could not let Councillor Khan’s comments stand regarding a Damascene Conversion; he had always supported and abided by the Nolan Principles and requested that his comments were retracted. He said there had not previously been a straight vote on the Nolan Principles, and this was an opportunity to do so and remove any ambiguity. He asked Members to support the motion.

 

The Chair moved to a vote. The substantive motion was approved, with 34 for, none against and 2 abstentions.

 

Council is RESOLVED that: 

 

Whereas it is noted that there has been some ambiguity over institutional and personal commitment to the Nolan principles as a result of conflation with other matters,

 

We, the undersigned, note that the Nolan Principles underpin all actions of this Council and our actions, in the public interest, as individuals. This Council reaffirms its commitment to the seven Nolan Principles of Public Life - Selflessness, Integrity, Objectivity, Accountability, Openness, Honesty and Leadership.