Agenda item

Report of the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer attaching a draft Social Media Protocol for Members for consideration by the committee and recommendation to the Council for adoption

The Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer introduced a draft social media protocol circulated with the agenda.  She explained that the Constitution Working Group had felt it prudent for the council to have a protocol, which was intended to provide good practice guidance to members when interacting on social media and to provide legislative and Code of Conduct (CoC) context for use of social media by members.  The draft protocol acknowledged the significant benefits of social media, whilst addressing the underlying risk associated with using it, given that it creates a permanent written record.  The Monitoring Officer stressed that the protocol related only to use by members acting in their role as an elected member as opposed to any purely personal use. 

The Constitution Working Group had intended the protocol to be a comprehensive stand-alone document which was why the protocol provided legal and Code of Conduct context.  The committee was referred specifically to pages 46-48 of the agenda pack, which set out some social media do’s and don’ts.  The committee was advised that there was no requirement for the council to have a social media protocol, some authorities had one and some did not.  The council’s Communications Team had been consulted, as had all members of the Council.  Members were referred to the summary of comments received from members, which had been circulated in advance of the meeting (Appendix 1).  The Monitoring Officer provided responses to each of the three comments received;

Councillor 1 could be assured that the protocol related only to the use of social media in their role as a councillor including circumstances where the member is giving the impression of acting as a councillor.  This protocol did not apply to use of social media in a personal capacity. 

In relation to councillor 2’s comments the Monitoring Officer advised that the members’ Code of Conduct set out, in full, the requirements relating to public interest and disclosure to a third party, which was not precluded by the Code of Conduct.  The Code of Conduct required that a member seek written advice from the Borough Solicitor and make a decision on that basis. 

In response to the comments from councillor 3, it was confirmed that there was no requirement for the council to have a protocol and it was a matter for the Committee to decide whether to recommend it for approval by Council.

Collectively members were of the opinion that adoption of a protocol on this topic was unnecessary and whilst they felt that the document contained useful advice, albeit some of it was common sense, they felt that it would be more appropriate to communicate it as part of the induction and ongoing development offered to members.  The Committee also considered it to be wholly appropriate for a reference to the fact that it was inappropriate for members of regulatory committees to be communicating on social media during a meeting, to be added to the Constitution and asked that the Constitution Working Group consider this matter.

Upon a vote it was unanimously

RESOLVED that;

1.    The committee did not consider the adoption of a Social Media Protocol for members to be necessary. However it was considered that the Constitution Working Group should be asked to consider the addition to the Constitution of reference to the inappropriateness of the use of social media, by members, during regulatory committee meetings.

2.    The content of the Social Media Protocol be used as a training tool for members as part of the induction and ongoing development and the Constitution Working Group be tasked with considering the addition to the Constitution, of reference to the use of social media, during regulatory committee meetings being inappropriate.