Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Dumfries and Galloway > LA/DG/450

Note Of Decision Web Version

Complaint no. LA/DG/450 concerning an alleged contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct by Councillors John Agnew, Grahame Forster, Robert Higgins, Sandra McDowall, William Scobie and Thomas Sloan of Dumfries and Galloway Council

1. Complaint number LA/DG/450 alleged a contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code") by Councillors John Agnew, Grahame Forster, Robert Higgins, Sandra McDowall, William Scobie, and Thomas Sloan of Dumfries and Galloway Council ("the respondents").

2. It was alleged that the respondents had contravened the Code, in particular, the requirement to ensure that a development decision was properly taken and that parties involved in the development process were dealt with fairly.

3. The person complaining ("the complainant"), alleged that as members of the Wigtown Area Regulatory Committee the respondents failed to take account of the evidence before them in considering and approving a planning application in respect of a dwelling house at Craignarget, Auchenmalg.

4. In considering planning applications members are required to take account of differing points of view. The overall requirement is to treat the parties fairly, take account of the information laid before them, observe national and local planning policy and other material considerations and act in a reasonable manner. Where members opt to determine an application against the recommendation they should give reasons which are precise, specific and relevant to the application. Failure to observe these requirements could open members to liability under the Code as failing to ensure that their decision has been properly taken, and in extreme circumstances give rise to suspicion or the appearance of improper conduct.

5. Having regard to these requirements, members are given a wide degree of latitude in their consideration of planning applications, and may set aside policy should they feel it appropriate to do so. The presumption in favour of policy is recognised in Dumfries & Galloway by the requirement to refer non-compliant decisions to the wider Planning & Environment Services Committee, which is regarded as the 'guardian' of Council planning policy.

6. In this case I was reliant on the minute of the Area Regulatory Committee for the record of the decision of 12 April 2006. Contemporary notes of the meeting did not exist and it would have been unwise to base my finding on the recollection of individual contributions to the debate on the Craignarget application. It was clear however that the decision was made by the Area Regulatory Committee as a corporate group and proceeded on the basis of a majority view – only one member expressing a dissenting view which failed to find a seconder. While it was suggested by the complainant that the decision to recommend approval did not place proper weight on the case refuting the applicant's contention of the existence of a prior dwelling on the site, there was no substantive evidence supporting that suggestion.

7. The Council's Governance Officer was present at the meeting of the Area Regulatory Committee and he detected no impropriety in the manner in which this application was dealt with. The procedure adopted was in accordance with Standing Orders, and a summary of the objectors' representations, although not the letters themselves, was incorporated within the officer's report. In the event the respondents, acting corporately, opted to recommend approval and followed correct procedure in referring the application to the Planning & Environment Services Committee for final determination. It was apparent that the reasons underlying the recommendation were not articulated in the minute and the weight of evidence against the existence of a previous dwelling on the site might well have been regarded as persuasive. I did not however consider that in participating in the recommendation to approve the application the respondents, as individuals, acted in such a manner which could reasonably be taken to show unfairness or impropriety to the degree contemplated by the Code and I found accordingly.

8. Having considered the information that arose from my investigation, I concluded that Councillors John Agnew, Grahame Forster, Robert Higgins, Sandra McDowall, William Scobie, and Thomas Sloan of Dumfries & Galloway Council had not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

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