Mrs Valerie Bracken (Chair)
Councillors Bell, Kitchen, J. Lane, M. Smith, Mrs Barnes, Mr Berry and Town Councillors Carter and Milne.
Steven Pleasant, Chief Executive, Sandra Stewart (Executive Director Governance / Monitoring Officer) and Pam Williams (Executive Director, Finance).
Councillor S Quinn
There were no declarations of interest submitted by members of the Standards Committee.
The Minutes of the proceedings of the Standards Committee held on 12 March 2013 were taken as read and signed by the Chair as a correct record.
The Head of Risk Management and Audit Services submitted a report, which explained that over the last few years new guidelines had placed the responsibility on local authorities to have corporate policies in place covering information governance. Since the introduction of the Data Protection Act 1998 employees had a defined responsibility to handle personal information in a safe and secure way. The expectations and requirements placed on Council employees had grown, following the issue of the Data Handling Guidelines, the additional guidance issued by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and the numerous publicised losses of very sensitive information.
The purpose of the framework was to support employees in adhering to the principles of the Data Protection Act whilst discharging their duties. By putting in place a system of controls to mitigate the risk exposures identified which should prevent information breaches. The objective was to keep the Council, employees and the information subjects safe and prevent the ICO from issuing a monetary penalty (up to £500,000) or enforcement notice for non-compliance against the Council, but also potential individual fines or prosecutions against employees.
The revised Information Governance Framework had generated a number of new documents and had incorporated some existing policies which provided support to the ethos of information governance. These were detailed and appended to the report as follows:
In addition to the work on the documents and guidance relating to the Framework, workshops and one to one training had taken place with employees in high risk areas to raise awareness of their obligations in relation to information security, whilst awaiting the implementation of the framework. Additionally, the Information Risk Officer and the Risk and Insurance Manager had provided assistance to managers and employees regarding specific situations. An E-Tutorial had been launched in September 2010 and completed by the majority of employees and would now be followed up with new and revised mandatory training through the AGMA Virtual College.
Furthermore, an initial risk assessment had been undertaken with managers and business support managers for all non PC users to determine their exposure to information risks resulting in several groups of employees being assessed as very low risk and therefore not requiring any training.
It had become apparent during the creation / revision of the policies that to satisfy the requirements of the Data Protection Act, the ICO and best practice and mitigate the risk exposures facing the Council there may be some impact on service delivery. It was critical that the framework was practical and supported as the Council would be heavily criticised by the ICO for introducing a process that was ignored. Therefore every effort had been made to ensure that workable solutions had been recommended by consultation with senior managers and by learning from the enforcement actions issued by the ICO.
A comprehensive communication, training and awareness strategy was being developed to ensure that the framework was successfully implemented and that messages were getting to and being understood by the end users. Due to the constantly changing landscape of information governance both in terms of guidance and technologies all the framework documents would be kept under constant review to ensure they continued to meet the needs of the business.
The Monitoring Officer added that the procedures, guidelines and protocols were being recommended to support the public’s expectations regarding the security of the information they provided to the Council and also to provide a level of risk mitigation and protection for not only the Council but individuals as well. She reminded Members that in 2010 the Standards Committee had recommended that a Social Media Use: Responsible Conduct Policy and employee guidance be adopted by the Council. This had become key in terms of making sure staff engaged effectively when utilising social media.
Standards Committee members commented on recent national cases which stated the need for agencies to share information about children at risk. There appeared to be uncertainty amongst organisations regarding when information could and should be shared. It was clearly important that individuals were confident that information shared with other organisations was kept safe and secure. Sometimes practitioners must just use their own professional judgement to decide what information would be relevant and to share information or not and what information would be appropriate and relevant to be shared.
The Monitoring Officer advised that a piece of work was being undertaken across AGMA regarding joint shared protocols focusing in particular on safeguarding and health and she would keep Standards Committee Members advised on progress.
In conclusion, Members welcomed the proposed policies, procedures and protocols contained in the Information Governance Framework, and:
Resolved:
Consideration was given to a report of the Monitoring Officer, which provided a reminder of the principles governing the conduct of local government members in England and Wales to reflect the implementation of the Localism Act 2011, which came into force on 1 July 2012. This included a copy of the revised plain English guide for councillors on openness and transparency on personal interests and a copy of the revised illustrative text for a code of conduct for members and co-opted members of local authorities.
The report provided detail on the background to the regime, making particular reference to:
She explained that the guide was intended to give straightforward information about how councillors should be open and transparent about their personal interests. It had been revised with new guidance making it clear that councillors should treat Trade Union membership as a personal non pecuniary interest. Standards Committee members noted that this had always been the case and Tameside members had always declared it.
Resolved:
The Monitoring Officer submitted a report which addressed concerns raised that the new regime under the Localism Act 2011 was not working, the Committee on Standards in Public Life had decided to keep a watching brief over, and if necessary investigate, the system for local government standards. She made reference to a paper appended to the report from Clive Sheldon, Queen’s Council and one of the country’s top public lawyers, setting out a couple of examples of cases dealt with under the new regime so that members could see whether the view taken by the Committee on Standards in Public Life was justified. Clive Sheldon QC’s paper also highlighted the challenges posed by social media, which Standards Committee members had discussed in the last item.
In response to a query from Mrs Barnes, the Borough Solicitor advised that the Council was confident in its procedures for dealing with complaints and made reference to two cases where, following consultation with the Chair, she had asked the Local Government Ombudsman to review the Council’s process. In both cases, the Ombudsman had concurred with the Authority’s decisions giving confidence and assurance that these matters had been dealt with appropriately. She agreed to share the details of the complaints with Standards Committee Members.
In addition, she advised that the Council was subject to a robust and efficient local audit regime covering financial statements, regularity, propriety and value for money.
Resolved:
That the content of the report be noted.
The Register of Interests and Gifts and Hospitality were made available at the meeting for inspection.
The Chair advised that there were no urgent items for consideration at this meeting.
It was agreed that the Standards Committee meeting arranged for Tuesday 12 November 2013 be rescheduled to take place in January 2014.