Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > East Lothian Council > LA/EL/57

Complaint no. LA/EL/57/A&B concerning an alleged contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct by (i) Councillor Norman Murray; and (ii) Councillor Pat O'Brien of East Lothian Council

1. Complaint LA/EL/57/A&B alleges contraventions of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code"). The Code was issued by the Scottish Ministers in terms of Section 1 of the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc. (Scotland) Act 2000 ("the 2000 Act") and came into effect on 1 May 2003.

2. The person complaining is Councillor Charles Ingle ("the complainant") and he has alleged contraventions of the Code by Councillor Norman Murray ("the first respondent"), and Councillor Pat O'Brien ("the second respondent"). The respondents are elected members of East Lothian Council ("the Council").

3. The complainant alleges that since his resignation as a member of the Labour Administration in November 2003 the respondents have treated him in a thoughtless and offensive manner, and undermined his ability to function effectively as an elected member. It is alleged that this conduct breached the key principle of Respect set out in Section 2 of the Councillors' Code of Conduct:

"You must respect all other councillors and Council employees and the role they play, treating them with courtesy at all times".

4. While the complainant undoubtedly perceives that his ability to undertake his duties as a councillor have been adversely affected as a result of the issues detailed above he is unable to point to specific areas in which this has arisen. There is no evidence that he has been excluded from any matter in which he would have had an interest, and indeed several witnesses have spoken of the degree of attention given to Councillor Ingle.

5. Councillor Ingle accepts that his manner is on occasions forthright, albeit well-intentioned. He views transparency and openness as essential features of the democratic process.

6. In regard to Councillor Ingle's complaint I am satisfied that the instances cited by him do not demonstrate an absence of respect or courtesy on the part of the respondents. The decisions in relation to the complainant's suitability for appointment as an ex-officio Justice of the Peace, his replacement as Chair of the Education and Children's Services Policy and Performance Review Panel, and his appointment to another review panel were all within the authority and judgement of the respondents. Similarly the respondents were entitled as senior members of the Council to append their names jointly with the Chief Executive to a letter which sought to warn him following a reported incident involving the complainant and a member of staff. The merits of these individual decisions fall outwith the remit of the Standards Commission, rather it is the manner in which they were taken and communicated to the complainant that may have an impact on the key principle of Respect.

7. In regard to the warning letter sent to the complainant following an incident with a member of staff, I am satisfied that it was appropriate. It would however have been appropriate to stipulate the specific instances of conduct to which it referred. However the respondents and the Chief Executive have stressed that they did not perceive it as the commencement of disciplinary action but as a warning intended to draw the complainant's attention to the matter and induce him to moderate his approach. I do not take issue with this action, particularly as it was taken against a background or previous complaints and disciplinary measures taken internally within the Labour Group.

8. The complainant also perceives that there was an absence of respect and courtesy in that he was not informed personally as to the decisions in regard to appointments, and his removal from the Chair of the Education and Children's Services review panel. These decisions were however communicated within the formal minutes of the relevant council meetings, and the respondents have explained that it would not be normal practice to enter into individual correspondence or discussion with the affected members. While the communication may have lacked individuality it does reflect a formal process and generally accepted means of notification.

9. Decisions on appointments to council committees are taken on a consultative basis between the senior members of the Administration. In allocating office-bearing roles an attempt is made to reflect the political balance of the council. In this case the complainant had held his position as Chair of the Education and Children's Services PPRP as a member of the Labour Group, and to retain the balance of allocation the post therefore fell to be filled on his resignation by a member of the same party.

10. There is no evidence that the respondents individually or in collusion have sought to undermine the complainant's ability to undertake his role as an elected member.

11. Accordingly I have concluded that having regard to the findings in section 5 of this Note, Councillors Norman Murray and Pat O'Brien have not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

D Stuart Allan,
Chief Investigating Officer.
Forsyth House
Innova Campus
Rosyth Europarc
Rosyth
Fife
KY11 2UU
25 August 2004