Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Angus > LA/An/921

NOTE OF DECISION WEB VERSION

Complaint no. LA/An/921 concerning an alleged contravention of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct by Councillor Alex King of Angus Council

1. Complaint number LA/An/921 alleged a contravention of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct (“the Code”) by Councillor Alex King (“the respondent”).

2. It was alleged that the respondent had contravened the Code, in particular, the provisions in section 2 of the Code relating to Respect.

3. The complaint related to remarks about the complainant which the respondent made in an email to a Council officer. The person complaining (“the complainant”), Councillor David Fairweather, alleged that the respondent's actions breached the key principle of Respect in paragraph 2.1 of the Code of Conduct

4. The complainant had approached a Council officer with a request that his fellow Arbroath councillors be consulted for their views on whether a financial contribution might be made from the Arbroath Common Good Fund towards a community fireworks display. It was a straightforward proposal with relevant information provided, and there was nothing contentious about the manner in which the complainant set out the request in an email.  The Council officer duly consulted all Arbroath councillors on the matter and circulated the email to them and to other Council officers.

5. The respondent was entirely at liberty to disagree with the proposal, even to disagree forcefully if that was how he felt.   However, the reply which the respondent sent by email was not simply a forceful expression of disagreement.  The expressions used by the respondent in the email, including references to the complainant making the request "in pursuit of his own personal desires" and trying to use the Common Good Funds to prove he was "not just the nobody everyone knows (him) to be!" did not constitute the considered reply which any officer having to conduct the Council's business is entitled to expect from a councillor.  It amounted, rather, to a personal attack on another member of the Council, namely the complainant.

6. I found that the conduct of the respondent, in replying as he did, fell short of the consideration that should be shown towards a Council officer carrying out his duties.  It also fell short of the standard of behaviour that should be shown towards another member of the Council, which is envisaged and expressed in the key principle of Respect contained in the Councillors' Code of Conduct.  For that, the respondent is to be criticised.  However, I noted that the respondent did not circulate his reply more widely to other councillors and officers who had originally been consulted.  I also considered that he was entitled to raise the question of interest, although not in the manner adopted by him. After considering all the circumstances, I concluded that the conduct of the respondent was not of a sufficient severity to engage the provisions of the Code.  Any assessment made by me had to have regard to the background context relating to the complaint.  I found there was joint ongoing political failure of the Council Administration and the SNP Opposition Group to establish a necessary level of collaborative working, notwithstanding political differences, which contributes to combative conduct among councillors. It is also the case that there is a level of personal difficulty and indeed apparent animosity between the complainant and respondent which colours their judgement on how they conduct themselves in relation to one another. This is highly unfortunate, not least for the electorate of the ward they both represent. It reflects no personal credit on either of them.

7. In reaching my determination that the respondent had not breached the Code, I took into account that this incident occurred within the context of significant tensions between the two main political groups on the Council, and against the background of a considerable level of animosity between the two individual councillors.  I also considered that this has been exacerbated by the corporate failure in good governance as established by the Accounts Commission, deriving from the endemic political failure of senior councillors in the leadership of both the Angus Alliance Administration and the SNP Opposition Group to promote and support collaborative working. I have accordingly made a recommendation to the Council arising from this complaint.

Summary of Conclusion

8. Having considered the information that arose from my investigation, I concluded that Councillor Alex King had not contravened the Councillors’ Code of Conduct.

Recommendation to the Council

9. I endorse and support the Findings of the Accounts Commission and the Audit Scotland Best Value 2 Audit Report regarding the current poor political relationships within Angus Council and the assessment that there is a specific need to improve the Council’s governance “by ensuring that all political groupings can work better together to improve outcomes for the people of Angus”.  I consider this to be a matter of some urgency. The Standards Commission for Scotland has, as part of its Guidance on the Code, encouraged all Councils to adopt and operate local arrangements or protocols for inter-councillor working which it was envisaged would also enable minor difficulties between elected members to be resolved at political leadership levels within the Council without the need for reference to me.

10. I welcome the undertaking of the Council’s Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer regarding the development of such a protocol for Angus Council as part of the Council’s response to the Findings of the Accounts Commission.  I would observe, however, that it will not be sufficient simply for such a document to be adopted by the members of Angus Council.  The Council then requires to implement and apply its terms. I strongly urge all councillors, particularly senior councillors comprising the leadership in both the Angus Alliance Administration and the SNP Opposition Group, now to rise to this challenge.

11. I would make clear that there is an absolute entitlement for any councillor, individual or organisation to submit a complaint to me alleging a breach of the Code.  I would also observe that not all aspects of councillor conduct are covered by the Code. The Council’s Chief Executive or the Monitoring Officer are both well placed to provide information on the past application of the Code to any councillor who is considering the submission of a complaint to me.  Councillors can also directly avail themselves of the resource which has been built up on the Standards Commission/Chief Investigating Officer web-site of previous case decisions since the introduction of the Code in 2003.

D Stuart Allan

Chief Investigating Officer

44 Drumsheugh Gardens

Edinburgh

EH3 7SW

10 August 2010