Issue - meetings

The report of the Monitoring Officer sets out an allegation made by way of a complaint against a Borough Councillor concerning a potential breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

The Assessment Panel is asked to make a determination in respect of whether or not any action should be taken.

The Deputy Monitoring left the meeting whilst this item was considered.

The Panel considered the report of the Monitoring Officer setting out an allegation by way of complaints received from The Deputy Monitoring Officer and a councillor about Councillor E.

The Monitoring Officer presented detailed information about the nature of the complaint and preliminary enquiries and discussion with the Independent Person consulted by way of background to the current complaint.

The Panel then went on to consider the options open to it:

(a)      the Panel is able to ask the Monitoring Officer to direct that the complaints are investigated;

(b)      to direct the Monitoring Officer to take other appropriate action short of a formal investigation, for instance trying to secure an apology;

(c)       alternatively the Panel can decide to take no action in respect of the complaints; this may be where the complaint appears to be trivial, vexatious, malicious, politically motivated or tit-for-tat.

Complaint from Deputy Monitoring Officer against Councillor E

The Panel considered option (c), to take no action, but decided that this was not appropriate bearing in mind that some of the evidence provided was sufficiently substantial and serious to warrant further investigation as there was a potential to be a breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

In considering option (a), to direct that the complaint is investigated, the Panel considered that if the allegation was substantiated, there potentially had been a breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct and the nature of the complaint was serious enough to warrant a full investigation to ensure the Council’s reputation was not damaged. The Panel considered that social media training should be provided to all Councillors.

Resolved:

1.    To direct the Monitoring Officer to arrange an investigation of the complaint.

Complaint from a councillor against Councillor E

The Panel considered the report of the Monitoring setting out an allegation by way of a complaint about Councillor E.

The Monitoring Officer presented detailed information about the nature of the complaint and preliminary enquiries and discussion with the Independent Person consulted by way of background to the current complaint.

The Panel considered option (c), to take no action, and decided that this was appropriate bearing in mind that evidence provided was not sufficiently substantial and serious to warrant further investigation as there was no potential to be a breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Resolved:

1.    To take no further action.

The report of the Monitoring Officer sets out an allegation made by way of a complaint against a Borough Councillor concerning a potential breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

The Assessment Panel is asked to make a determination in respect of whether or not any action should be taken.

The Panel considered the report of the Monitoring Officer setting out an allegation by way of a complaint received from a member of the public about Councillor B.

The Monitoring Officer detailed the circumstances which had led to this complaint.

The Panel went on to consider the complaint having regard to the Assessment Criteria. It identified that there was a potential to be a breach of the Code of Conduct.

The Panel then went on to consider the options open to it:

(a)      the Panel is able to ask the Monitoring Officer to direct that the complaint is investigated;

(b)      to direct the Monitoring Officer to take other appropriate action short of a formal investigation, for instance trying to secure an apology;

(c)       alternatively the Panel can decide to take no action in respect of the complaint; this may be where the complaint appears to be trivial, vexatious, malicious, politically motivated or tit-for-tat.

The Panel also had regard to advice from the Independent Person, that Councillor B did not dispute the facts and had requested that a full investigation be undertaken.

In considering option (a), to direct that the complaint is investigated, the Panel decided that the complaint did warrant a full investigation.

The Panel agreed on the following appropriate action:

1.    That a full investigation be undertaken

2.    Training be arranged for all Members in how to handle negative tweets or comments on social media.

Resolved that the Panel directs the Monitoring Officer to undertake a full investigation into the facts surrounding the complaint.