Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Argyll and Bute > LA/AB/282

Note Of Decision Web Version

Complaint number LA/AB/282 concerning an alleged contravention of The Councillors' Code of Conduct by Councillor Gordon McKinven of Argyll & Bute Council

1. Complaint number LA/AB/282 alleged a contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code") by Councillor Gordon McKinven ("the respondent").

2. It was alleged that the respondent had contravened the Code, in particular, the provisions relating to Confidentiality set out in paragraph 3.15 and 3.16 of the Code.

3. The person complaining ("the complainant") alleged that in May 2005, at a committee meeting of Milton West Tenants & Residents Association, the respondent raised no objection to the distribution and discussion of correspondence between the complainant and the Council. The complainant also alleged that in June 2005, at a meeting of Argyll Community Housing Association, the respondent referred to personal details derived from the earlier meeting of Milton West Tenants & Residents Association.

4. The complainant was a tenant of the Council and had occupied a house within the respondent's Milton Ward in Dunoon since 2000. As a local resident she was instrumental in setting up the Milton West Tenants & Residents Association, and was also a Board member of Argyll Community Housing Association.

5. The respondent attended meetings of Milton West Tenants & Residents Association on a voluntary basis as the local councillor. He attended meetings of Argyll Community Housing Association as a Board member, having been appointed to that role by the Council.

6. At a meeting of Milton West Tenants & Residents Association held in April 2005, the complainant sought to raise several questions about the Council's service provision within Milton West on behalf of a tenant who could not be present at the meeting. On a ruling from the chair that such questions could not be put without the attendance of the tenant concerned, the complainant then resolved to address them directly in a letter to the Council.

7. In April 2005 the complainant wrote separately to the Area Housing Manager, and to the Chief Executive of Argyll & Bute Council. The letter to the Area Housing Manager dealt with matters regarding the management of housing in Milton West, while the letter to the Chief Executive raised formal complaints about housing allocation policy and private meetings between the Area Housing Manager and the Chair of the Tenants & Residents Association.

8. The Area Housing Manager passed the letter to the Chair of the Tenants & Residents Association who decided to distribute copies at the next meeting.

9. In May 2005, at the next meeting of the Milton West Tenants & Residents Association, the complainant learned that the chairperson had been provided with copies of both letters and intended to distribute and discuss these at the meeting. The respondent was present at the meeting in his capacity as the local councillor. He raised no objection to the chairperson's intentions and the content of the letters was duly discussed.

10. In June 2005 the complainant and respondent both attended a meeting of Argyll Community Housing Association. The complainant raised the matter of correspondence between a tenant and their landlord not being treated in confidence and suggested that reassurance should be given to tenants in this regard. The respondent intervened, expressed a view that this had no relevance to the meeting, and referred to the context in which the complainant's letters to the Council had been discussed at the meeting of Milton West Tenants & Residents Association.

11. In regard to the meeting of Milton West Tenants & Residents Association in April 2005 the respondent had no advance knowledge that the complainant's letters to the Council were to be distributed or discussed. Neither was he aware of any internal reference to the Council's Data Protection Officer. The only personal information contained within the letter and its attachment was the names and addresses of two tenants, this information being publicly available via the Voters Roll.

12. The letter sent by the complainant to the Area Housing Manager dealt with generic rather than personal issues which had already been raised in summary at the meeting in April. As the complainant originally sought to discuss these matters in open session at the meeting it was apparent that the complainant did not regard them as confidential at that point, and I did not consider that the contents of this letter could reasonably be considered confidential.

13. The letter to the Chief Executive indicated an element of complaint about Council policy and concern that the local housing officer has discussed issues within the remit of the Tenants & Residents Association privately with the Chair of the Tenants & Residents Association. There was nothing inherently confidential within the content of this letter although I did not endorse its distribution outwith the confines of the Council. The letter was not marked by the complainant as being private or confidential, and the author's intent that it be circulated wider within the Council was apparent from the fact that she also sent copies to the Head of Housing, the Area Housing Manager, and the Council's Housing Spokesperson.

14. Irrespective of the non-confidential nature of the letters, it was clear that the respondent himself did not provide copies to Milton West Tenants & Residents Association. Their distribution at the meeting was undertaken at the instance of the chairperson, and while the respondent might perhaps have influenced her decision by urging greater discretion, particularly in regard to the complainant's letter to the Chief Executive, he was not specifically empowered or required to do so. I was therefore of the view that the respondent did not breach the terms of paragraphs 3.15 or 3.16 of the Code and I found accordingly.

15. In regard to the meeting of Argyll Community Housing Association on 8 June 2005 the respondent again had no advance knowledge that the complainant intended to raise issues with a bearing on this complaint under the heading of Other Competent Business. He did not dispute that he intervened and referred to issues raised at the meeting of the Tenants & Residents Association, or that he complied with a direction by the chairman that the matter was outwith the scope of Housing Association business. Again I detected no material disclosure of confidential information and accordingly found that the respondent had not breached the terms of paragraphs 3.15 or 3.16 of the Code in that regard.

16. The complainant also raised a concern at the respondent's agreement to chair a meeting of Milton West Tenants & Residents Association to consider her continued membership of the committee. The terms of paragraph 3.18 of the Code extends its scope to organisations only where a councillor attends as an appointee or nominee of the Council. The respondent in this case had not been appointed or nominated to attend meetings of the Tenants & Residents Association and as such his agreement to chair a meeting was subject to the rules of that body rather than the Councillors' Code of Conduct. Accordingly his actions in that capacity were outwith the jurisdiction of the Chief Investigating Officer.

17. Having considered the information arising from my investigation, I concluded that, Councillor Gordon McKinven had not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

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