Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > North Lanarkshire > LA/NL/167

Notice of Decision Web Version

Complaint no. LA/NL/167 concerning an alleged contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct by Councillor Thomas Barrie of North Lanarkshire Council

1. Complaint number LA/NL/167 alleged a contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code") by Councillor Thomas Barrie ("the respondent").

2. It was alleged that the respondent had contravened the Code, in particular, the key principles of the Code relating to Duty, Openness and Leadership and paragraphs 7.2, 7.7, 7.8, 7.9 and 7.10 all of which deal with planning applications.

3. The person complaining ("the complainant") Mr A, alleged that the respondent at a special meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee of North Lanarkshire Council participated in discussion about and voted upon a planning application by George Wimpey West Scotland having previously indicated his support for his application.

4. In his response the respondent refuted the allegation and wrote that, while he had for many years advocated development of the site in question, he had never had any contact of any sort with Wimpey and "it is a matter of complete indifference to me which company does the building".

5. The planning application in this case had been submitted by George Wimpey West Scotland and was received and recorded by North Lanarkshire Council. It was an application for the construction of 156 dwelling houses on the green belt site at Cavalry Park, Kilsyth. After due process a special meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee of North Lanarkshire Council was held and a motion was moved and seconded that the application be granted in accordance with the Director of Planning and Environments recommendation subject to the conditions contained within his report. An amendment was moved and seconded that the application be refused on the grounds that the application was premature at that time pending the outcome of consultation in respect of the North Lanarkshire local plan. On a vote being taken 2 members voted for the amendment and 16 members (including the respondent) voted for the motion which was accordingly declared carried.

6. In his complaint the complainant whose house is situated approximately 100 yards from Cavalry Park wrote "the complaint concerns the action taken on this date by Councillor Barrie in speaking and voting in favour of the application despite secretly supporting and encouraging the application for a number of years previously whilst claiming impartiality in public". In the supporting documents sent with the complaint the complainant included a copy of a letter which was sent by a planning and development consultant acting on behalf of Messrs George Wimpey UK Ltd to the Director of Planning and Environment of North Lanarkshire Council. The writer had copied this letter to the respondent and in the letter he wrote "I would also add that I have had discussions with the local elected member Councillor Tom Barrie and he too is keen to promote subject site as quickly as possible." The respondents position on this sentence in letter was that prior to when the writer of the letter retired as the Director of Planning of North Lanarkshire Council he (the respondent) had numerous discussions with the writer of the letter on the subject of the development of Cavalry Park. The respondent pointed out that the writer of the letter could not have been referring to discussions about the planning application submitted by George Wimpey West Scotland as the letter had been written more than a year before that planning application had been submitted.

7. The respondent accepted that for many years as a matter of general policy he had supported the development of the Cavalry Park site. However, merely holding a view - which the Council had expressed - in favour of development of a particular site does not explicitly or by implication mean that an individual councillor has reached a particular view on a specific application prior to the meeting of the Planning Committee when that application is considered. Indeed a councillor could be in favour of development of a particular site in principle and legitimately hold a separate view as to the merits of a particular application which is forthcoming.

8. The respondent in this case denied prejudging the merits of this planning application and speaking and acting in favour of it prior to the planning meeting which the application was considered.

9. No evidence was found to contradict the respondents position and he was entitled to hold a view in favour of development of the site without contravening any of the provisions of the Code.

10. Having considered the information that arose from my investigation, I concluded that, Councillor Thomas Barrie had not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

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