The Standards and General Purposes Committee of Buckinghamshire Council met on Thursday 15 October 2026 to discuss the council's annual complaints report, a proposed county-wide community governance review, and member code of conduct complaints. The committee noted an increase in Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaints, particularly concerning Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND), and discussed plans to improve complaint handling and service quality. Regarding the proposal for a county-wide community governance review, the committee resolved to take no further action on the motion, opting instead to continue considering individual requests on a case-by-case basis. The committee also reviewed member code of conduct complaints, noting that no breaches were found in the second quarter of 2026/27, although several cases remained open. The committee agreed to receive further updates on open complaints and to consider adding an outcome column to future reports for greater clarity.

Complaints and Feedback Annual Report and Ombudsman Update

The committee received the annual report on complaints and feedback for 2025/26, which highlighted an increase in both Stage 1 and Stage 2 corporate complaints. Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) continued to be a significant area of concern, accounting for a large proportion of escalated complaints and upheld findings by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO). While Stage 1 complaints were largely met within the 20-working-day target, Stage 2 performance was more challenging, with 67% answered within the 40-working-day target.

Adult Social Care was presented as a positive example, with a revised approach leading to a 50% reduction in complaints escalating to the Ombudsman. The council received 652 compliments, with staff helpfulness and good customer service being frequently praised. A comprehensive Complaints Improvement Plan for 2026/27 has been developed, focusing on enhanced training, greater service ownership, improved reporting through a case management system, and leveraging technology for better customer insight and self-service options.

The report also detailed that the council paid £133,609.63 in financial remedies during 2025/26, with Children's Services accounting for the largest portion, linked to SEND pressures. The LGSCO's annual letter indicated that 69 out of 75 investigated complaints were upheld, with 100% compliance with LGSCO remedy recommendations. Benchmarking against Wiltshire and Cornwall showed Buckinghamshire's Stage 1 complaint rate was between the two, but its Stage 2 rate was higher, indicating a need to focus on reducing escalation.

Lloyd Jeffries, Service Director for Business Operations, explained that the integration of complaints and information governance into the Customer Improvement Service aims to strengthen organisational learning. Andy Hallsworth, Head of Customer Improvement and Governance, and Gemma Tamplin, Complaints and Feedback Business Partner, were also present to answer questions. Councillor Kelly Thornton raised concerns about the response periods mentioned in the report, questioning if they included extensions. Councillor Maru Mormina sought clarification on how learning from complaints was being embedded across services and how the committee could track this. Councillor Mary Bateman specifically questioned the high number of upheld complaints related to SEND and why they were not resolved internally. The discussion also touched upon the difficulty in quantifying the exact cost of complaints, with plans to improve this through the iCaseload management system.

County-wide Community Governance Review

The committee considered a motion referred from Full Council proposing a county-wide Community Governance Review (CGR). Tom Fowler, presenting the report, explained that such reviews are typically recommended every 10 to 15 years, and Buckinghamshire Council, being only six years old, was not yet at that point. While the council has mechanisms to review community governance on an ongoing basis and can be required to undertake a review through a valid petition, a county-wide review was deemed resource-intensive and not currently supported by evidence of systemic issues.

Councillor Maru Mormina expressed that the report lacked evidence to support a decision and that intermediate options, such as a phased review, were not considered. Councillor Martin Tett CBE agreed, stating that there was no demand from parish councils in his ward for such a review and that it would be a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Councillor John Chilver supported taking no further action, highlighting the council's recent formation and the existence of a process for case-by-case reviews. Councillor Karen Dickson also questioned the timing, noting that the High Wycombe CGR had concluded only two years prior.

After discussion, the committee resolved to take no further action on the motion for a county-wide Community Governance Review, opting instead to continue considering individual requests on a case-by-case basis.

Member Code of Conduct Complaints - Quarter 2 Review, 2026/27

Glenn Watson, Senior Governance Manager, presented the report on Member Code of Conduct complaints for Quarter 2 (July to September 2026). A total of eight complaints were received concerning Buckinghamshire Council councillors, and seventeen concerning Parish and Town councillors. Of these, fourteen Parish/Town council complaints and seven Buckinghamshire Council complaints were closed during the quarter, with no breaches of the Code found in any of the closed cases. However, four complaints remained open at the time of the meeting: three concerning Parish/Town councillors and one concerning a Buckinghamshire councillor.

A significant point of discussion revolved around social media complaints. Councillor Nidhi Mehta and Councillor Kelly Thornton raised concerns about recurring complaints related to social media posts, questioning the effectiveness of training and the process for determining whether such posts constitute a breach of the Code of Conduct, especially when balanced against freedom of expression. Councillor Maru Mormina and Councillor Karen Dickson also sought clarification on the distinction between a complaint being dismissed and a formal finding of a breach, with it being clarified that only Stage 3 investigations can result in a formal finding of a breach.

The committee also discussed the possibility of including more detailed information on the outcomes of complaints, particularly at Stage 1, to provide a clearer picture of how behaviours are addressed, even if they do not escalate to a formal breach. It was noted that a complaint concerning a Parish Councillor from Quarter 1 had progressed to Stage 3 and would be considered by the Hearings Sub-Committee. The committee agreed to receive further updates on open complaints and to consider adding an outcome column to future reports for greater clarity.

Work Programme

The committee noted the work programme for 2026/27, which included the items discussed at this meeting and future planned discussions on code of conduct complaints, community governance reviews, and the council's constitution.