Independent Ethics Panel

What does the panel do?

The council is committed to the highest standards of ethical conduct for its elected councillors and officers. As part of this the council has set up an Independent Ethics Panel.

The panel helps the council promote and maintain high standards of conduct by councillors and officers. It gives advice about what should be in the councillors code of conduct and how complaints about members should be handled.

Panel members are asked to advise whether individual complaints should be investigated, and make recommendations to be taken into account by the Audit and Transparency Committee before it takes a decision on a complaint.

The panel also has a broader remit to advise the council on matters relating to ethics and ethical conduct, anticipate ethical challenges and foster good practice.

The panel meets in private but must produce an annual report of its work. The panel's latest report was published in April 2025.

Ethics Panel Annual Report 2024 to 2025

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Independent Ethics Panel Annual Report

1. Introduction

The Independent Ethics Panel continues in its role to promote and maintain high ethical standards within the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. Over the past year, the panel has advised on code of complaints, made contributions to national consultations about public conduct, and informed the council’s response to systemic issues highlighted by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. This report outlines our activities.

2. Membership

The panel comprises three Independent Persons appointed under the Localism Act 2011:

The Revd Ijeoma Ajibade (2018 - )

Ijeoma is the Chief of Staff to the Archbishop of Canterbury. She has spent most of her career working in local government and also worked for the London Assembly and for two Mayors of London (Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson).

Mr Shajad Hussain (2019 - )

Shajad is a Licensing Manager for Transport for London, responsible for London Taxi and Private Hire Vehicles, including the investigation of complaints against drivers.

Mr Mark Jarvis (2022 - )

Mark has 40 years experience in investment banking and finance. He retired from EY after 20 years as a Partner and Group CFO following many years with Robert Fleming & Co, one of the last UK family-owned merchant banks. He now works as a NED and Board Advisor on numerous companies and charities.

The panel is supported by officers, including the Chief Executive, Maxine Holdsworth and Monitoring Officer, LeVerne Parker.

3. Role and remit

The panel’s role is to:

• advise the council on the best practice to promote and maintain high standards of conduct by councillors and officers advise the council on the adoption or revision of a members’ code of conduct
• advise the council on the adoption or revision of the arrangements for dealing with complaints alleging a breach of the members’ code of conduct
• advise whether a complaint relating to a breach of the code should be investigated
• make recommendations to be taken into account by the Audit and Transparency Committee before it takes a decision on a complaint which has been investigated
• advise the council on matters relating to ethics and ethical conduct, anticipate ethical challenges and foster good practice
• make relevant recommendations on these matters to the Chief Executive and the Monitoring Officer

As well as continuing to provide an effective independent voice in member conduct issues, the panel seek to assist the council in answering the following question:

"Is the council doing all a reasonable organisation could be doing to prevent unethical behaviour and promote high ethical standards in the conduct of its political and managerial operations and decision making?"

4. Progress and activities

Code of conduct complaints

In 2024, the panel reviewed fourteen complaints involving elected members. Cases included seven complaints made by staff against Cllr Eva Jedut, who was also the subject of two further complaints from residents which were investigated and another complaint from a resident which was not. The complaints made by staff and residents, which were investigated, progressed to hearing before the Audit and Transparency Committee.

None of the five complaints against other members progressed to investigation. They were all resolved informally with the member the subject of the complaint treating the complaints with appropriate seriousness, respecting the process and offering their co-operation in liaising with the Monitoring Officer to reach an outcome. This approach aligns with our preference for constructive resolution where possible and shows the effectiveness of informal processes when members engage responsibly.

Case studies

Cllr Eva Jedut

The panel reviewed a particularly significant case involving Cllr Eva Jedut, who was the subject of nine separate complaints—seven from staff members and two from residents. This case exemplifies the financial and administrative burden of complex conduct investigations, the challenges posed by non-engagement with the standards process, and the limitations of the current sanctions regime.

The complaints from staff related to Cllr Jedut's behaviour towards them personally or towards team members. The Monitoring Officer instructed an external solicitor, Claire Ward of Anthony Collins Solicitors, to investigate these complaints, which cost £11,162 in external fees. Additionally, the Monitoring Officer and Deputy Monitoring Officer spent over 167 hours managing the case, representing a significant diversion of senior officer time away from other council priorities.

Throughout the process, Cllr Jedut demonstrated reluctance to engage constructively. The investigating officer reported that Cllr Jedut refused to meet with her, even via Microsoft Teams, which the investigator described as unprecedented in her extensive experience of standards investigations. During the Audit and Transparency Committee hearing on 10 February 2025, Cllr Jedut requested an adjournment, claimed procedural unfairness, and ultimately chose to leave the proceedings rather than participate fully.

The committee found Cllr Jedut in breach of multiple provisions of the code of conduct, including requirements to respect and value officers, treat people with respect, avoid bringing the council into disrepute, and promote high standards through leadership. The committee recommended a formal censure and mandated training.

Cllr Jedut had previously been offered a bespoke programme of training and support following earlier complaints, which she had not taken up. The recurrence of similar issues despite previous interventions raises important questions about the effectiveness of available sanctions and remedial measures.

In addition to the staff complaints, the Audit and Transparency Committee also considered two complaints from residents about Cllr Jedut's conduct. The first complaint concerned Cllr Jedut's behaviour at a residents' meeting in her ward, made by a resident who was present at the meeting. The second complaint was from a resident who sent an email to Cllr Jedut seeking help with an issue in her ward and complained that her email was misused.

In the case involving the misuse of a resident's email, the committee found that Cllr Jedut breached four provisions of the Code of Conduct, including the requirements to act fairly and impartially, to act respectfully, to promote high standards through leadership, and to fully cooperate with the investigation. The committee emphasised "the importance of councillors being able to bring attention to the council issues raised by residents but emphasised that this must be done with the permission of the resident who raised the issue."

As with the staff complaints, Cllr Jedut declined to engage constructively with the investigation process, refused to provide mitigation to the committee, and ultimately received the same sanction of a formal censure recommendation to full council.

Cllr David Lindsay

A previous complaint against this councillor had been resolved informally, with the elected member making a full apology and undertaking relevant training. The complainant was satisfied with this outcome. Nonetheless, the incident was reported in the national media some months later. Even though the case had been properly resolved within the code for handling such complaints, the perception arose that the issue had been ‘covered up’ by not being publicly reported at the time.

We advised the chief executive on how to handle this internally and externally and considered where there might be a public interest in publicising complaints even when they do not proceed to a full investigation. This case raised important questions about transparency and confidentiality in the complaints process, and we encouraged the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer to always consider when it might be appropriate to make public disclosures about member conduct issues.

Grenfell Tower Inquiry engagement

The panel contributed to the council's response to the Phase 2 Report of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, particularly focusing on culture change and accountability. Our advice focused on ways to help understand and address the systemic issues identified in the Inquiry's findings. We highlighted the need for transparent decision-making processes, clear lines of accountability, and a culture that values resident engagement and safety. A forthcoming independent review of council culture will incorporate panel input.

Responding to national consultation about local standards

In early 2025 the government launched a consultation about ways to strengthen the local government standards regime. We responded highlighting the strengths of Kensington and Chelsea's ethics panel structure, and encouraged the government to allow local committees to impose stronger sanctions on those found to have breached the code. Our submission drew on the panel's experience with cases like that of Cllr Jedut to illustrate the limitations of current sanctions and the need for more effective deterrents for serious misconduct.

5. Themes and issues arising

Repetitive conduct issues

The case of Cllr Jedut highlights the limitations of the current standards framework. We have observed that the current sanctions available to local authorities are insufficient, particularly when dealing with persistent misconduct. We believe there is a clear need for escalation measures when sanctions are ignored or prove ineffective.

The February 2025 hearings revealed that, despite previous sanctions and offered support, Cllr Jedut's problematic behaviour continued. The committee noted that "at a hearing of previous complaints, it recommended a number of measures, including a bespoke programme of training and support which Cllr Jedut chose not to take up." This demonstrates a clear pattern of non-compliance with the standards regime that the current system struggles to address effectively. We hope that future changes to the national framework will fill this gap.

Political party responsibilities

As we approach the local elections in May 2026, we again encourage political parties to ensure that candidates are vetted and trained adequately to prevent misconduct. Those selected to stand for public office should have the skills and aptitude to represent their communities, and should receive appropriate training and briefing on the relevant codes of conduct and wider issues of ethics and behaviour.

6. Future work and recommendations

The ethics panel has identified several key areas for continued focus in the coming year to strengthen ethical governance within the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea:

Culture review engagement

The panel aims to play an active role in the forthcoming independent review of council culture following the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, with a particular focussing on embedding ethical considerations into all aspects of council operations and decision-making processes.

Standards regime reform implementation

As the government consults on strengthening the local government standards regime, the panel will advise the council on implementing any resulting changes. We will focus particularly on maximising the effectiveness of any enhanced powers to sanction misconduct. We believe that meaningful consequences for serious misconduct are essential to maintaining public confidence in local democracy.

Induction and training development

With local elections scheduled for 2026, the anel will advise on the development of induction and training for incoming councillors, with a particular focus on issues of ethical conduct.

7. Conclusion

The panel recognises the commitment of the vast majority of councillors and officers to upholding the core ethical principles of public service. The issues we have identified in this report, however, demonstrate the need for vigilance and more robust mechanisms for addressing misconduct when it occurs.

Looking ahead, the implementation of lessons learned from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and the forthcoming independent review of organisational culture present important opportunities to strengthen ethical conduct and governance throughout the council. The panel is committed to supporting this work, as well as continuing to provide independent oversight and advice in relation to conduct and other ethical issues. Through that commitment we hope to ensure the council can continue to serve the residents of Kensington and Chelsea with integrity and accountability.

The Independent Ethics Panel

Revd Ijeoma Ajibade, Shajad Hussain, Mark Jarvis

April 2025

Who are the members of the panel?

Panel members are appointed by the council as Independent Persons under the terms of the Localism Act 2011.

The current Panel Members are:

• The Revd Ije Ajibade
• Mr Shajad Hussain
• Mr Mark Jarvis

Further reading:

Independent Ethics Panel - Terms of Reference

1. Purpose
   1. To act independently to advise the council on matters of ethics and ethical conduct and to exercise the functions of the statutorily appointed Independent Persons under the Localism Act 2011.
2. Responsibilities
   1. To advise the council on the best practice to promote and maintain high standards of conduct by the members and co-opted members of the council.
   2. To advise the council on the adoption or revision of a cembers’ code of conduct.
   3. To advise the council on the adoption or revision of the arrangements for dealing with complaints alleging a breach of the members’ code of conduct.
   4. To advise whether a complaint should be investigated.
   5. To make recommendations to be taken into account by the Audit and Transparency Committee before it takes a decision on a complaint which has been investigated.
   6. To advise the council on matters relating to ethics and ethical conduct, anticipate ethical challenges and foster good practice.
   7. To make relevant recommendations on these matters to the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer.
   8. To give regular updates on the work of the panel to the Chief Executive, Monitoring Officer, Administration Committee and full council.
3. Membership and operation
   1. The panel will be constituted of three Independent People appointed by the council in accordance with the Localism Act 2011.
   2. As far as possible, membership of the panel will ensure it has the following skills and experience:
      
      • knowledge of local government
      • legal expertise
      • experience of ethics and ethical judgements
      • accountability to the public
      • professional or personal connection to Kensington & Chelsea
      
      
   3. The Localism Act prohibits any person who within the last five years has been a member, co-opted member or officer of the council, from being appointed as the Independent Person who has the statutory role of giving views on any complaint about the conduct of a member of the authority.
   4. Section 28(8)(a) of Act also stipulates that person is not independent (and cannot therefore be considered for appointment) if the person is:
      • a member, co-opted member or officer of the authority
      • a member, co-opted member or officer of a parish council of which the authority is the principal authority, or
      • a relative, or close friend, of a person within sub-paragraph (i) or (ii).
   5. Members of the panel will be remunerated at the rate of £300 per day for a minimum of four days’ work per year.
   6. The panel, once established, will advise on its mode of operation. Meetings of the panel will be chaired on a rotating basis by one of the three panel members.

Proposed changes to ethical governance

The Royal Borough Of Kensington And Chelsea Administration Committee –11 June 2018 Report Of The Chief Executive And The Monitoring Officer Proposed Changes To Ethical Governance

This report recommends changes to the members’ code of conduct and to the arrangements for dealing with complaints alleging breaches of the code and proposes the establishment of an independent ethics panel. The report also recommends changes to the member/officer protocol.

For decision

1. Introduction
   1. At its meeting on 16 May 2018 the Administration Committee agreed with our proposal to carry out a review of ethical governance in the Council, including the 'Members Code of Conduct' and the arrangements for dealing with complaints that members have breached the code.
   2. In the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire tragedy, the committee acknowledged that the council needs to ensure that it attains the highest ethical standards in its governance and management.
   3. This means that the council expects elected members and council officers to display the highest standards of ethical conduct over and above adherence to the seven Nolan principles of conduct in public life.
   4. We owe a special duty to those who are bereaved and/or who survived the Grenfell Tower fire tragedy. In 2017, the council formally agreed to adopt the principles set out in Bishop James Jones’ 'Hillsborough Charter for Families Bereaved through Public Tragedy'. The council has committed to, amongst other objectives, treating people with respect and courtesy, and being open and accountable. Adhering to the best possible ethical standards will help us live up to these commitments.
   5. The proposals in this report aim to make emphatically clear the high standards of conduct expected from members, and to strengthen the credibility and independence of arrangements for adjudicating on complaints when those standards are not felt to have been met. They also make clearer the distinctive roles of officers and members.
   6. These changes contribute to the council’s response to the review by the Centre for Public Scrutiny (CfPS). Their report 'Change at the Council' identified twelve principles which it encouraged the council to incorporate into its codes of conduct.
   7. This report recommends
      
      • changes to the Members Code of Conduct
      • changes to the arrangements for dealing with complaints that members have breached the code of conduct including the reference of complaints to an independent ethics panel
      • the establishment of an ethics panel to advise the council on best practice and to provide advice on complaints
      • changes to the protocol on member/officer relations to clarify the roles of and the relationships between members and officers
   8. The above changes are part of a number of proposals to strengthen ethical governance at the council. For example, the committee will be asked in July to approve amendments to the “Code of Conduct protocol for councillors involved in planning matters”. The officers’ code of conduct is also being reviewed by the council’s Human Resources department.
   9. A full response to the CfPS report in respect of the way the council makes decisions will be considered by Leadership Team in July.
   10. Officers have consulted with the council’s current Independent Person in developing these proposals and revising the members' code of conduct.
2. Proposed changes to the members’ code of conduct
   1. The council has a duty under the Localism Act 2011 to promote and maintain high standards of conduct by members. In discharging this duty, the Council must adopt a code of conduct, consistent with the “Nolan Principles” ie the Seven Principles of Conduct in Public Life, dealing with the conduct that is expected of members and co-opted members when they are acting in that capacity.
   2. The council’s code of conduct was first adopted by the Council in July 2012. Our proposed amended Code can be found at Appendix 1 to this report.
   3. The most significant amendments are to:
      
      • require members to treat people with respect, paying particular attention to the commitments of the Charter for Families Bereaved through Public Tragedy.
      • recognise that members are expected to have a continual dialogue with residents to understand their needs and views.
      • clarify when the requirements of the Code apply.
      • include the Seven Principles of Conduct in Public Life (in their original form) in an Appendix to the Code.
      • require members not to conduct themselves in a manner which is likely to bring the council into disrepute.
      • require members to promote equality and to not unlawfully discriminate against any person.
      • require members to notify the Monitoring Officer of any offers of gifts or hospitality, either accepted or declined, with an estimated value of at least £20 (the current Code provides for any gifts and hospitality accepted and with an estimated value of at least £50 to be declared)
   4. The amendments are consistent with the following principles recommended in Change at the Council: connecting with residents; listening to every voice; acting with integrity; being clearly accountable.
3. Proposed changes to arrangements for dealing with complaints and the establishment of an ethics panel
   1. The Localism Act 2011 requires the Council to put in place arrangements under which any complaints that members have breached the code of conduct can be investigated. The council must appoint at least one Independent Person whose views must be sought and taken into account by the council before makes a decision on a complaint which it has decided to investigate.
   2. Under the currently adopted arrangements, complaints can be settled informally by, for example, an apology by the member who is the subject of the complaint. Complaints which are investigated, and where the investigating officer concludes that there is evidence of the breach of the code, are formally considered by the Audit and Transparency Committee which will take into account the views of the currently appointed Independent Person.
   3. To further demonstrate our commitment to the highest ethical standards, we propose that the Council sets up and appoints an Independent Ethics Panel, made up of three Independent Persons appointed under the Act. This panel will carry out the statutory role in relation to complaints, specifically:
      
      • advising the council on the best practice to promote and maintain high standards of conduct by the members and co-opted members of the council
      • advising the council on the adoption or revision of a members’ code of conduct
      • advising the council on the adoption or revision of the arrangements
      • for dealing with complaints alleging a breach of the members’ code of conduct
      • advising whether a complaint should be investigated
      • making recommendations to be taken into account by the Audit and Transparency Committee before it takes a decision on a complaint which has been investigated
      
   4. We also propose that the panel should have a wider remit to advise the council on matters relating to ethics and ethical conduct, anticipate ethical challenges and foster good practice.
   5. Our proposed terms of reference for the ethics panel are set out in Appendix 2.
   6. We propose that the option, in appropriate circumstances, for complaints to be dealt with quickly and informally by the Monitoring Officer, following consultation with an Independent Person or the Ethics Panel, remains.
   7. Members of the panel will be appointed through an open recruitment process in line with the current job description and person specification for the Independent Person.
   8. The council currently pays the Independent Person an allowance of £500 a year. We propose remunerating members of the panel with an allowance of £300 per day, anticipating a minimum of four days’ work per year.
      
4. Protocol on Member/Officer Relations
   1. The 'Protocol on Member/Officer Relations' is contained in the council’s constitution. Its purpose is to make clear the respective roles and responsibilities of members and officers so that residents and others in the Borough are best served.
   2. This protocol has been amended to make clearer the distinction between the democratic responsibilities of members and the operational and managerial roles of officers. It sets out what officers and members should expect from each other and how they should forge a positive working relationship. A fully revised version can be found at Appendix 3.
   3. It also adds some detail on how decisions are made and the particular roles of officers and members in preparing reports, giving and receiving briefings, and making decisions.
   4. The CfPS review specifically recommended that the council “clarify the different roles of officers and members in the decision-making process”.
      
5. Financial Implications
   1. The council currently pays the Independent Person an allowance of £500 a year. These costs are included in the council’s revenue budget. If the proposals in this report are agreed, allowances will increase to a minimum of £1,200 per year per panel member. Based on three panel members, as set out in the report, costs are expected to be £3,600 per year. These additional costs can be funded from an existing corporate budget and contained within the existing revenue budget.
      
6. Equality Implications
   1. The council when taking decisions in relation to any of its functions must comply with its public sector equality duty as set out in s149 of the Equality Act 2010. The changes we propose in this report will, in our view, have a positive impact by strengthening the ethical governance of the council and its interaction with and understanding of the communities it serves.
   2. The appointments to the ethics panel will be advertised in accordance with the provisions in the Localism Act 2011 and the recommendations for appointments made following the consideration of appropriate and relevant selection criteria.
      
7. Recommendations
   1. The Administration Committee is asked to recommend that the council:
      
      a) adopt the revised members’ code of conduct
      b) agree that the arrangements for dealing with complaints are amended by the introduction of an independent ethics panel
      c) agree the terms of reference and membership of the ethics panel
      d) agree the proposed allowance for the Independent Persons
      e) adopt the revised member/officer protocol, and
      f) delegate the authority to the Monitoring Officer to make any necessary consequential or incidental changes to the documents to be approved by council or to the constitution to ensure that the approved ethical governance arrangements work coherently together.

Barry Quirk
Chief Executive

LeVerne Parker
Monitoring Officer

Background Papers – None

Contact Officer – LeVerne Parker Chief Solicitor and Monitoring Officer 020 7361 2180