���˿���

It is important to note that the Scottish Government’s choices, criteria and policy decisions are encouraging more people to come forward. There is no doubt about that, which must have a knock-on effect on how much this will cost. If people feel that dignity, respect and fairness are there, more will take up the opportunity to apply, as the system might not be seen as being as draconian or strict as it used to be. They might not have chosen to come forward in the past due to stigma and difficulties. The Government must take that into account and come to a conclusion about how this should be progressed and managed.

It might appear that, when councillors put some pressure on council officers or when there is a bit of tension, the officers feel that they need to rein in the councillors in some way and the code of conduct is a way of doing that.

I think back even to my time as a councillor, although I have been out of it now for 10 years. The code of conduct was used against me occasionally to say, “You know, if you do that, then we might have to go down that route”. When a councillor is trying to find out information about specifics, there has to be trust between them and the official, and if that trust breaks down in any way, the code could be used as a weapon.

Do you think that is the case? Is the code being used in some ways to stymie, stop or manage some actions or behaviours? Or is it just something for the official who thinks, “I am the professional in this process and you have a justification to inquire, but if you overstretch the mark, then my professionalism could be compromised”?

It would be good to know because the complaints are increasing. There is a tension between councillors and officials, with the councillor wanting or seeking information and the official feeling, “I can give you so much” or “I have to adhere to some levels”. The tension is obviously still there and, if there is a problem and an increasing number of complaints, there must be some kind of structure behind it.

From time to time, members of a council administration and members of a council opposition are not given the same information. A councillor may be seconded with an official who is there to support them but, in some cases, that is not available—opposition councillors are sometimes disadvantaged when trying to understand or be given information, and they have to find their own way through that process. That can be frustrating, and it can lead to a bit of distrust between the councillors and the officials.

There can also be conflict in a joint board involving people from both health boards and the council, with councillors trying to manage both. Officials from the health board and officials from the council do not always see eye-to-eye about what they want out of the process, and the councillor has to walk a tightrope between them and sort out the problems. I can, therefore, see that there might be opportunities for difficulties on other occasions within boards and in other locations. However, it has been good to have you explain where you are in that process, because I think that is the way forward.

My last question is about the reopening of previously closed cases. A number of cases have been reopened, as you touch on in your annual report. Could you provide some more information about why that has happened and what merits the reopening of a previously closed case?

How damaging is the negative publicity about the code? Does it have a reputational impact?

I touched on the role of the monitoring officer when I spoke to Ian Bruce earlier. There needs to be parity of compliance and awareness. Do you find that it is the case across the 32 local authorities that the monitoring officer is aware of the issues around compliance and is supportive when it comes to people’s awareness of what is required? My political party had the opportunity to meet you recently—I am quite pleased that I instigated that meeting in some way. It is good for us to do that sort of thing but there is also a role for the compliance and monitoring officer in a council to do something similar.

Thank you, convener. Good morning, Ian—it is good to see you.

The code of conduct is probably now embedded in how councils, councillors and officials operate. In your report this year, about 40 complaints come from either councillors or council officers, and about 44 complaints are about disrespect or discourtesy during a council meeting or a board meeting. Individuals are aware of the working parameters and so are officials or officers, but there is a role for the local authority monitoring officer in the process, and it would be good to get a feeling from you of what you think about that role.

We now have a standard of way of working. There are parameters that officials and councillors need to work within, and the monitoring officer is there to ensure that they do that. You have said that some councils are a bit more toxic and more challenging, depending on their make-up and the way they operate as a council, and that not all councils are doing the same thing. It would be good to get a flavour of what you think the role of the monitoring officer is and how it helps—or maybe does not help. Maybe the role creates some issues within a council.

There is still a relatively small number of complaints by council officers about councillors, but we have seen a slight increase in the number.

Okay—thank you.

You have already touched on negative press about the code, and you have talked about the work of the code and surveying it. Authorities provide training for councillors, through the monitoring officer, and political groups also try to give them guidance—a group leader or deputy leader will try to support their council colleagues if they need it. There may well even be an internal appraisal system within the council group as to how councillors are performing or behaving, to manage the behaviour or ability to progress of anyone who may need more training.

You have talked about the surveys you have done in the past and the one you are planning to do in the future. It would be good to get a flavour of what you see the survey attempting to do. Will it try to ascertain whether there is a knowledge gap, or will it try to find out whether there are areas for improvement that need to be re-examined to ensure that there is a transparency when it comes to understanding the code?

One thing that has an impact on training is the time that is taken up by the process of dealing with, for example, a breach of the code, as people know that it could be some time before there is a resolution. People might be put off if they think that it will take two or three years for the case to come to a resolution, so there is no point in engaging in training, as things will have moved on. Alternatively, they might still feel that they want some kind of action at the end of that process. How do you address that?