Drawing the Line: Reclaiming Standards of Behaviour in Local Government

In local government, we pride ourselves on serving communities with integrity, professionalism, and respect. These values are not just aspirational they are foundational. Yet, beneath the surface of our daily operations, a quiet erosion can occur. It’s not loud, not headline-grabbing, but it’s dangerous. It’s the insidious creep of behavioural standards and attitudes that, if left unchecked, can corrode trust, fracture collaboration, and destabilise the democratic principles we are sworn to uphold. This erosion rarely arrives with a bang. It begins in whispers: a dismissive comment in a meeting, a passive-aggressive email, a refusal to engage constructively across political divides. It’s the eye-roll when someone speaks, the silence when support is needed, the subtle undermining of professional boundaries. Over time, these behaviours become normalised. The line between acceptable and unacceptable conduct blurs not because people don’t know where it is, but because no one is actively defending it.

And therein lies the danger. When poor behaviour is tolerated, it is tacitly endorsed. When it is ignored, it is repeated. When it is repeated, it becomes culture.

The Challenge of Political Diversity

Local government is inherently pluralistic. Officers and elected members bring with them a rich tapestry of political beliefs, personal values, and lived experiences. This diversity should be our greatest strength it allows us to reflect the communities we serve and to debate ideas robustly. But without clear behavioural boundaries, it can become a source of division and dysfunction. As one senior officer recently put it:

“We don’t need everyone to agree. We need everyone to behave.”

The issue is not disagreement it’s how disagreement is handled. Healthy debate is the lifeblood of democracy. But when political beliefs become personal attacks, when officers are treated with suspicion or hostility for doing their jobs impartially, when members feel emboldened to cross the line without consequence, the organisation suffers.

This is not just a matter of workplace etiquette. It’s a matter of public service ethics. Officers are not political pawns. Members are not corporate adversaries. We are all part of the same system, and that system only works when mutual respect is non-negotiable.

Reclaiming the Line

Reclaiming behavioural standards is not about creating a sterile, conflict-free environment. It’s about drawing a line a clear, visible, and enforceable line between robust debate and disrespectful conduct.

That line must be:

• Codified in organisational values, member-officer protocols, and codes of conduct.

• Modelled by senior leaders and elected representatives alike.

• Defended by everyone, not just HR or Monitoring Officers.

• Enforced with consistency, transparency, and courage.

This is not a soft issue. It is a strategic imperative. Because when behaviour slips, so does morale. So does retention. So does public trust.

As the Committee on Standards in Public Life has warned:

“Ethical standards in public life are not self-sustaining. They require constant vigilance and reinforcement.”

Drawing the Line

What’s needed in local government is not just a vague aspiration for civility it’s a clear, non-negotiable standard of human interaction. A behavioural baseline that applies to everyone: officers, elected members, senior leaders, and support staff alike. This is not about enforcing uniformity of thought or suppressing political debate. It’s about enforcing basic decency.

In a sector built on public trust, the way we treat each other internally is not a side issue it’s central to our credibility. Respect is not optional. Professionalism is not conditional. And dignity in dialogue must be the minimum, not the ideal.

This line must be:

• Visible: It should be codified in organisational values, member-officer protocols, induction materials, and leadership expectations. It must be written down, spoken aloud, and embedded in the culture not just referenced when things go wrong.

• Vocalised: Senior leaders and political figures must reinforce it regularly. Not just in times of crisis, but in everyday conversations, team briefings, and council meetings. Culture is shaped by what leaders tolerate and what they challenge.

• Vigilantly Protected: Breaches must be addressed swiftly, transparently, and consistently. There can be no exceptions based on seniority, political affiliation, or perceived influence. The moment we allow one person to cross the line without consequence, we invite others to do the same.

As the Local Government Association rightly notes:

“Respectful working relationships between councillors and officers are essential to good governance and effective service delivery.”

This is not just a matter of internal harmony it’s a matter of public accountability. When standards slip inside the organisation, it reflects outwardly in the services we deliver, the decisions we make, and the trust our communities place in us. We must be brave enough to say: This is the line. And no one crosses it.

Tools and Frameworks for Upholding Behavioural Standards

Drawing the line is only the beginning. To ensure that standards of behaviour are not just aspirational but actively lived, local authorities need practical tools and frameworks that embed civility into the fabric of their organisations. These mechanisms should be proactive, inclusive, and enforceable.

1. Member-Officer Protocols

Many councils have developed robust Member-Officer Protocols to clarify roles, responsibilities, and expectations. These documents go beyond codes of conduct to define how respectful working relationships should operate in practice.

• Aberdeen City Council has embedded its protocol within a wider leadership and behavioural framework, aligning it with CIPFA’s governance standards and Audit Scotland’s recommendations .

• Westminster City Council recently revised its protocol to include the Nolan Principles and strengthen guidance on urgent member-officer interactions .

• Surrey County Council uses a collaborative protocol that outlines mutual expectations, including timely communication, impartial advice, and respectful public discourse.

2. Behavioural Charters

Behavioural charters are public declarations of shared values. While not all councils use the term “charter,” many have adopted similar tools:

• London Councils has a protocol that explicitly promotes equality, natural justice, and reasonableness in member-officer relations, offering protection for both parties .

• Oxfordshire County Council uses a protocol that emphasises honesty, integrity, and confidentiality, with advice available from the Monitoring Officer to resolve tensions before they escalate.

3. Restorative Practice

Restorative approaches are gaining traction in local government, especially in education and children’s services:

• Leeds City Council has embedded restorative practice into its Children and Families services, using it to build trust, repair harm, and promote accountability. It’s central to their ambition to be a Child Friendly City.

• Gloucestershire County Council implemented restorative practice in over 70 schools, reducing suspensions and improving attendance. Their “Relational Schools” programme includes trauma-informed training and whole-school cultural change.

4. Behavioural Audits

Behavioural audits help councils understand the lived experience of staff and members, identifying risks and opportunities for cultural improvement.

• The Local Government Association (LGA) provides an Improvement and Assurance Framework to help councils assess governance and performance. It encourages behavioural diagnostics as part of sector-led improvement.

5. Peer Accountability Models

Peer-led models are emerging as a way to decentralise responsibility for culture:

• The Association of Local Government Auditors (ALGA) runs a Peer Review Programme that helps councils assess their internal audit functions and governance culture. Over 40 peer reviews are conducted annually.

• Councils participating in ALGA’s programme report improved transparency, better internal controls, and stronger behavioural oversight.

Proactive Oversight

Even the most well-intentioned internal frameworks can falter if they are not actively upheld. When the line is crossed and worse, when it is tolerated then the responsibility must shift beyond the organisation. External oversight becomes essential. Local government operates within a democratic framework, but democracy does not mean disorder. It requires boundaries, respect, and accountability. If a council cannot or will not enforce behavioural standards internally, then central government must intervene to safeguard the integrity of public service.

This oversight could take several forms:

• Strengthened Codes of Conduct with Statutory Backing

  The current standards framework relies heavily on local discretion. A statutory code backed by legal enforcement would ensure consistency across councils and remove ambiguity around what constitutes unacceptable behaviour.

  
  

• Independent Behavioural Audits

  External audits, conducted by bodies such as the Local Government Association or the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny, can provide an impartial view of organisational culture. These audits should assess not just governance structures, but the lived experience of officers and members.

  
  

• Mandatory Training on Respectful Engagement for All Elected Members

  Just as safeguarding and data protection are non-negotiable, so too should be training on respectful conduct. This should be refreshed regularly and include real-world scenarios, conflict resolution techniques, and guidance on working across political divides.

  

As Lord Evans, Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, powerfully stated:

“The tone from the top matters. If leaders tolerate poor behaviour, it will spread.”

This is not just a warning it’s a blueprint. Leadership must model the standards they expect. And when they don’t, there must be consequences.

A Call to Action

Local government must be brave enough to say: This is not who we are.

We must be vocal in defending the dignity of our workplaces and the people within them. We must be unapologetic in our commitment to civility, respect, and professional integrity. Because silence is complicity. And tolerance of incivility is not just a workplace issue it is a threat to democracy itself.

This is a moment for councils to reset. To draw the line. To say, clearly and collectively:

• We will not allow disrespect to become routine.

• We will not allow political difference to justify personal hostility.

• We will not allow our standards to slip quietly into irrelevance.

Let us draw the line and never cross it.

 This blog post was sponsored by Alliance Leisure, the UK's leading leisure development partner, specialising in supporting local authorities to improve and expand their leisure facilities and services. Click the logo above and check out their website and services.