Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Aberdeenshire >LA/As/853

Note of Decision Web Version

Complaint no. LA/As/853 concerning an alleged contravention of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct by Councillor Debra Storr of Aberdeenshire Council

1. Complaint number LA/As/853 alleged a contravention of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct (“the Code”) by Councillor Debra Storr (“the respondent”).

2. It was alleged that the respondent had contravened the Code, in particular, the key principles of the Code relating to Duty, Selflessness, Objectivity, Openness, Honesty, Leadership and Respect.

3. The person complaining (“the complainant”), alleged that: - “On receiving a complaint from a constituent regarding access issues, Councillor Storr entered Menie Estate in a vehicle on Saturday 28 March. Councillor Storr was acting in her official capacity as councillor. She was found to be driving on private land by a member of the security staff. Councillor Storr took various photographs of the access gates on the site. Within days, Councillor Storr made allegations through the media that Menie estate staff had acted unlawfully by intimidating and detaining her. She also described the behaviour of the security staff as being 'thuggish'. Such allegations are false, defamatory and constitute misconduct. It appears Councillor Storr was seeking to harass and discredit our plans to construct a major golfing development for the people of Aberdeenshire.”

4. The allegations against Councillor Storr were that she: - “failed to abide by Section 1.1 of the Code of Conduct. Section 1.1 requires councillors' conduct to be above 'reproach'. Her allegations are false. Consequently Councillor Storr's conduct was far from above 'reproach' and an abuse of her public position. Councillor Storr has breached Section 1.5. of the Code which states that councillors must not encourage any action contrary to the Code of Conduct. Councillor Storr's allegations have received significant media interest. Unless condemned, Council members may be encouraged to make future allegations that breach the Code of Conduct and may damage Scotland's reputation as a place to do business. Councillor Storr has breached Section 2.1 of the code under the headings of Duty, Selflessness, Objectivity, Openness, Honesty, Leadership and Respect.

5. In making the complaint the complainant alleged that: - “On Saturday 28 March 2009, a yellow car was seen to be parked on our land. A member of our security team went to investigate the matter. After a short period of time Councillor Storr and a male walked to the car. The member of our security team attempted to establish a dialogue with them but he was ignored. Councillor Storr and her companion then entered the car and drove away over our private land used for access purposes. Councillor Storr was committing an offence by driving over our private access and so our security officer followed Councillor Storr in his own vehicle. He called the police to inform them of the situation. The police told him that they were sending out a unit to assist him. He then witnessed Councillor Storr stop at a number of locations on our private access and saw her take various pictures of our property.  He followed Councillor Storr down to the Mill of Menie where again she took further pictures. When she and her companion attempted to drive out of the estate, our security officer drove across the private access to block their exit. He then updated the police of his position. He was then asked by Councillor Storr why he was blocking their exit. He explained that he was detaining them until the police arrived having watched them drive over our private access and take pictures of our property. The police subsequently arrived at the scene. Councillor Storr then released a statement to the media. She described the conduct of TlGCS as 'thuggish', 'intimidating', causing 'harassment' and 'unlawful'. She also described our security officer as a 'goon'. Such allegations are offensive and defamatory and are unacceptable. Councillor Storr also used her website to place photos of our property on the internet. Councillor Storr should be condemned for breaching the Code of Conduct.”

6. Councillor Storr claimed that, having received a call from a constituent advising her that an entrance to the Menie Estate had again been locked, she   decided to check the situation out personally.  She drove to Leyton Cottage and parked there. Then, after a short walk on to the dunes, when she returned to her car, an unmarked silver car with an Arnold Clark logo on the side was parked at the access point. The owner of Leyton Cottage told her that the local representative of the Trump Organisation had been there and had asked about her car being parked.  She then continued her survey of the access points. On stopping at the first, the northern access to the core estate, she noticed the silver car had followed her and had stopped at some distance away. She thought this odd, so pulled over for a few minutes at a house on the Hatterseat road. The silver car stayed parked at the north access to the core estate. She then continued on to the main entrance to Menie House and then along the A90 towards Pettens and the turn to the Mill of Menie track. She noticed the same car parked at a gateway off the A90. She turned into the Mill of Menie track and drove to Mill of Menie. She spoke to the householders there and they noticed a silver car coming down the track and noted it stopping at a minor track that leads back to Menie House. They supposed the car to be connected to the estate. After a few minutes, she started to drive out only to find that the track had been blocked by the silver car. The driver of the car was in the passenger seat and was holding a camera, presumably to take a photograph of her car. Her partner got out and approached the silver car then returned to tell her that the driver, who was not wearing a uniform, had told him that as they had been taking photographs of the locked accesses, he had detained them until the police came. She got out of her car and phoned a fellow councillor to advise him of the situation and to ask him to contact the police. She then went to the silver car, introduced herself to the driver by name and asked why taking photos would be a cause to detain them. She also asked for the name of the driver. He merely said that he was estate security and declined to answer further questions.  Shortly thereafter the police arrived. They took details and after she had been detained for over 20 minutes, asked the driver of the silver car to move his car out of the way. She found being followed by an unidentified car intimidating.  The driver of the silver car made no effort to approach her at any time, and she considered that his actions were intimidating, and, by blocking her egress from Mill of Menie, unlawful. In the circumstances she considered that she was justified in making public her description of the events to highlight the access issues on the estate, and her own perceived predicament as a councillor being hindered in going about her lawful business.

7. The complainant alleged that, by driving on land owned by the Trump Organisation, Councillor Storr acted unlawfully. Her position was that she was entitled to visit residents on the estate in her capacity as their local councillor and to seek to investigate the circumstances which led them to contact her and to express their concerns about apparent access restrictions. I had the benefit of discussing these access issues with Aberdeenshire Council’s Outdoor Access Officer (North). I observed that there is no public right of vehicular access on the estate although residents (and visitors and other persons having a bona fide need to access property) have legitimate rights of access. The Scottish Outdoor Access Code does not (other than in exceptional circumstances) authorise vehicular access beyond existing access rights. Councillor Storr may, therefore, have been in a position to access the land, albeit on the basis of enjoying only limited access rights.

8. With regard to any right to detain (and in this case it appeared that it was a vehicle which was detained, not persons who were detained), I considered that, in the particular circumstances in this case, the purported exercise of any such right may have been inappropriate or, at least, excessive.

9. Also I understood that no legal proceedings, civil or criminal, were active or in contemplation in relation to Councillor Storr or the member of security staff involved.

10. With reference to the allegations concerning Councillor Storr’s statements, I observed that section 1 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct is the Introduction to the Code and the key principles in section 2 provide a context for and underpin the Code. Complaints of this nature should also allege a breach of the substantive sections of the Code. In any event I was satisfied that, as was acknowledged by the complainant, Councillor Storr has the right, which we all enjoy, to freedom of speech. The Code of Conduct takes account of this, and while I accepted the complainant’s right to disagree strongly with Councillor Storr’s comments, I was satisfied that they were not of a nature or to a degree as to amount to a breach of any part of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct.

11. Accordingly, having considered the information that arose from my investigation, I concluded that Councillor Debra Storr had not contravened the Councillors’ Code of Conduct.

D Stuart Allan

Chief Investigating Officer

Forsyth House

Innova Campus

Rosyth Europarc

Rosyth

KY11 2UU

07 August 2009