Agenda and minutes

To receive any disclosures of interest from councillors in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct for members.

Councillor Fidler informed the Sub-Committee that he had originally been identified as a complainant against Councillor E. He stated that it was his intention to remain objective. The Monitoring Officer confirmed she had spoken to Councillor E who had no objection to Councillor Fidler being on the Sub-Committee.

The Panel is asked to consider excluding the press and public from the meeting during consideration of the following item on the grounds that it is likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 2 (Information likely to reveal the identity of an individual) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

In making its decision, the Panel is asked to confirm that having regard to all circumstances, it is satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

In this case the proper administration of the complaints procedure in the public interest is that consideration of complaints should not be made public at an early stage, when the complaints may or may not be proved and may or may not be investigated.

The Panel considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following matter on the grounds that it was likely to involve the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

The Panel in making its decision had regard to all circumstances and was satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

RESOLVED that in the interest of having a frank and open discussion about the matter, the press and public are excluded from the meeting.

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 an Officer about Councillor E.

The Monitoring Officer detailed the allegations that had been made and the key considerations for the assessment panel.

The Panel went on to consider the complaint having regard to the Assessment Criteria.

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

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

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

(c)          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 had regard to advice from the Independent Person and noted that while Councillor E had offered an apology it would not be appropriate in this case.

It was RESOLVED that the Monitoring Officer be directed to instigate a formal investigation.

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 Councillor about Councillor F.

The Monitoring Officer detailed the allegations that had been made and the key considerations for the assessment panel.

The Panel went on to consider the complaint having regard to the Assessment Criteria.

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 and noted that Councillor F had declined to offer a public apology.

It was RESOLVED that the Monitoring Officer:

1.            Request, on behalf of the Sub-Committee, that the copy of the speech on Councillor F’s Facebook page be removed within 48 hours.

2.            Request, on behalf of the Sub-Committee, that Councillor F gives a public apology at the next Council meeting on 8 December 2022.

3.             Request, on behalf of the Sub-Committee, that Councillor F completes Equality and Diversity training within two months.

In the event of non-compliance with any of the above requests, the Monitoring Officer instigates a formal investigation.

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 Councillor about Councillor G.

The Monitoring Officer detailed the allegations that had been made and the key considerations for the assessment panel.

The Panel went on to consider the complaint having regard to the assessment criteria.

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 and noted that while a private  apology had been given by Councillor G, it was not sufficient.

It was RESOLVED that the Monitoring Officer:

1.            Request, on behalf of the Sub-Committee, that Councillor G gives a public apology at the next Council meeting on 8 December 2022.

In the event of non-compliance with the above request, instigates a formal investigation.