Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Angus > LA/An/75

Note Of Decision Web Version

Complaint no. LA/An/75 Concerning an alleged contravention of The Councillors' Code of Conduct by Councillor Alexander King of Angus Council

1. Complaint number LA/An/75 alleged a contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code") by Councillor Alexander King ("the respondent").

2. It was alleged that the respondent had contravened the Code, in particular, sections 5.17 and 5.18 relating to Declaration of Interests.

3. The person complaining ("the complainant") alleged that at a meeting of the Development Control Committee of Angus Council in January 2004 the respondent, having declared an interest in a planning application, participated in discussion and voting on the application when he should have left the meeting during its consideration.

4. In relation to this complaint the facts were not in dispute i.e. the respondent did declare an interest in respect of the relevant item on the agenda and also took part in the discussion and voting. Similarly the respondent did nominate a fellow SNP councillor to be appointed to chair the meeting while the relevant item was being discussed, although following a vote another councillor was duly appointed and took the chair.

5. The complainant was interviewed then subsequently intimated that he wished to withdraw his complaint. Notwithstanding the complainant's withdrawal of his complaint the matters raised by him were fully investigated as it was considered in the public interest to complete the investigation.

6. The relevant item on the agenda for the meeting of the Development Control Committee in January 2004 was a planning application in respect of the premises at 10E George Street, Montrose. This is the Parliamentary Office of the SNP Member of Parliament and is also used by the local SNP MSP. The application was for retrospective consent for repainting the office frontage and for the installation of metal security grills. It was a listed building application which was recommended for approval by the Director of Planning and Transport. It was generally accepted by all concerned that the subject of this application was of relatively minor importance when compared with many other planning applications.

7. It was clear from the minute of the meeting that at the outset three of the seven SNP councillors on the Committee declared an interest in the relevant item as members of the Scottish National Party and indicated that they would leave the meeting and not take part in any discussion or voting on the application. Likewise it is clear that the other three SNP councillors on the Committee, including the respondent, declared an interest in the item as members of the Scottish National Party but indicated that they did not consider their interests to be significant and that accordingly they would take part in any discussion or voting on the application.

8. Prior to the meeting, legal advice was sought by the Convener and Vice Convener of the Committee as soon as they became aware that the item was to be submitted at the Committee meeting. The Director of Law and Administration was sufficiently concerned about the matter to attend the meeting in person and she asked the Convener if she could make a statement at the commencement of the meeting. In that statement she referred to various paragraphs of the Code particularly paragraphs 5.11 and 5.18. She advised of the test which required to be considered and indicated that it was the responsibility of each councillor to make a decision about whether to declare an interest or make a judgement as to whether a declared interest would prevent them from taking part in any discussion or voting. Whilst she did not refer to this particular item there was no doubt from the questions which were asked by SNP councillors, including the respondent, that all were clear as to the item being referred to. Accordingly there is no doubt that members of the Committee are well aware of the legal position in terms of the Code of Conduct when taking their decision.

9. In this case it was found that, although the respondent (together with two other SNP councillors) did not accept the advice which he was given in its entirety, there was no evidence that the respondent failed to comply with the terms of section 5.18 of the Code in reaching his decision that in conscience he believed that his continued presence would not fall foul of the objective test in section 5.18 and that despite having declared an interest he was not precluded from involvement in discussion or voting.

10. In all the circumstances, it appeared that the respondent applied the correct objective yard stick in making his decision to participate in the discussion and voting on this planning application and accordingly there was no evidence that he had breached the terms of the Code.

11. Having considered the information that arose from my investigation, I concluded that, Councillor Alexander King had not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

12. In the course of this investigation the respondent and a number of other witnesses made the point that in relation to this planning application if one takes the view that membership of the SNP alone creates such a significant positive interest for certain Committee members as to preclude them from discussion and voting then it must follow that Committee members of other political parties must have an equally significant negative interest. Logically this should prevent them from participating in discussion and voting and this situation could lead to Development Control Committees being unable to deal with any planning applications which have party political implications.

13. As referred to above the complainant in this case withdrew his complaint although the matter was in any event fully investigated. The reason given for the withdrawal of the complaint was that it had been politically motivated against the SNP and that it was not a personal complaint against the respondent. This might be considered to highlight the need for those making complaints or inciting others to do so to be careful and mindful of the serious consequences of submitting a complaint alleging a breach of the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

D Stuart Allan,
Chief Investigating Officer.
Forsyth House
Innova Campus
Rosyth Europarc
Rosyth
Fife
KY11 2UU
30 September 2005