Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Moray Council > LA/Mo/01

Note of Decision - Case No. LA/Mo/01

Complaint against Councillor Sandy Keith, Moray Council

1. This case is a complaint by Councillor Linda Gorn alleging that Councillor Sandy Keith breached the Councillors' Code of Conduct by acting with disrespect and discourtesy to councillors and officers contrary to the principles of the Code set out in section 2 on Leadership and Respect. Both Councillors are elected members of the Moray Council who have their principal offices in Elgin, Morayshire.

2. With reference to Leadership, the Code provides that councillors have a duty to promote and support the principles upon which the Code is based by leadership and example and to maintain and strengthen the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the Council and its councillors in conducting public business. With reference to Respect, the Code provides that councillors must respect other councillors and all Council employees and the role they play, treating them with courtesy at all times.

3. Following the local government elections in May, 2003, the constitution of the Council was made up of 16 Independent members, 5 Labour members (including Councillor Keith), 3 SNP members, 1 Conservative member and 1 Liberal Democrat member (Councillor Gorn). The Independent and Labour members jointly have formed the Administration of the Council.

4. At the first meeting of the Council following the elections, Councillor Keith was elected, without division, as the Chairman of the Educational Services Committee. He had previously held that position since 1999.

5. The first meeting of the Educational Services Committee following the elections took place on 11th June 2003. Agenda items on Detached Youth Work and on the Public Private Partnership project involved sometimes quite tense discussion. Other items which also proved somewhat difficult were in relation to Community Learning and Development and Management Structures in Primary Schools. In all cases (other than the item on Community Learning and Development) the Committee came to a decision, without division.

6. Essentially the complaint is to the effect that Councillor Keith acted with disrespect and discourtesy to other councillors and council officials in the manner in which he conducted himself during these items of business.

7. It is fair to say that those interviewed who had attended the meeting differed in their views on whether Councillor Keith had acted disrespectfully or discourteously. All, however, were clear that no-one at the meeting had resorted to bad language of any kind, nor had there been any raised voices, although none had a precise recollection of exactly what Councillor Keith had specifically said during the items in question.

8. A number of persons who were interviewed and had been present at the meeting considered that Councillor Keith had been arrogant and rude, particularly when addressing points raised by Councillors Gorn and Paul and that this had amounted to disrespect of and discourtesy to them as Councillors. They also felt that his unwillingness to invite the education officials to make a contribution to a number of the items was disrespectful to the officials concerned.

9. Others who were interviewed and had been present at the meeting took the view that there had been no inappropriate conduct on the part of Councillor Keith particularly bearing in mind that a number of items of business were, to some extent, controversial and that, in respect of the first item on Detached Youth Work, Councillor Gorn had, in speaking, asked a number of detailed and pre-prepared questions which was inappropriate. There was support for the view that the contributions made by Councillor Keith were consistent with, and acceptable as part of, the robust debate that is often a part of committee and council discussions within local government. Of those who took that view some did indicate that Councillor Keith had been abrupt and sharp in his handling of certain of these items although others indicated that they saw the exchanges as being quite acceptable within the normal dynamism of political debate.

10. In assessing these divergent views, I have come to the conclusion that Councillor Keith's conduct at the meeting was, whilst somewhat brusque, abrupt and pointed in manner, not such that could reasonably be described as disrespect or discourtesy to other councillors or officials for the purposes of the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

11. Accordingly, I have decided that Councillor Keith has not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct in terms of this complaint and I find accordingly.

D Stuart Allan,
Chief Investigating Officer.
Forsyth House
Innova Campus
Rosyth Europarc
Rosyth
Fife
KY11 2UU
21st October 2003