Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Renfrewshire Council > LA/R/66

Note of Decision Web Version Complaint no. LA/R/66

Concerning an alleged contravention of The Councillors' Code of Conduct by Councillor James Harkins of Renfrewshire Council

1. Complaint number LA/R/66 alleged a contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code") by Councillor James Harkins ("the respondent"). Councillor Harkins is an elected member and Leader of Renfrewshire Council.

2. It was alleged that the respondent had contravened the Code, in particular the principles relating to planning.

3. The person complaining ("the complainant") was a director of a company called Curo Salus Limited which had plans to open a residential home providing therapeutic care for young children. The company acquired a property in the Johnstone area of Renfrewshire for this purpose and applied to Renfrewshire Council for planning approval for a change of use to enable it to operate. The complainant alleged that Councillor Harkins interfered with the processing of the planning application by putting pressure on planning officers and the Planning Department to recommend refusal of the application.

4. In response Councillor Harkins claimed that he acted at all times solely in the interests of local residents and of Abbeyfield House, both of whom were likely to be affected by the proposed development. The local residents were concerned about the lack of information relating to the planning application and the management of Abbeyfield House was concerned that the lives of its elderly residents could be disturbed.

5. Councillor Harkins claimed that his interest in the planning application was solely to secure more information about the application for local residents and Abbeyfield House, including the planning considerations against which the application would be assessed.

6. He rejected the allegation that he expressed a view on the planning application before it was considered by the Planning and Development Board of the Council, that he discussed the merits of the application with the Planning Department or that he put pressure on officers of the Department to recommend refusal of the application.

7. Outwith the information and views expressed by the complainant and Councillor Harkins the main body of evidence is from interviews with four officers of the Planning Department, including the Director of Planning and Transport and the Head of Planning. They demonstrated a sound knowledge of planning procedures and of the boundaries between the roles of officers and members. They were also fully aware of the protocols which members have to observe in order to comply with the Councillors' Code of Conduct. They were clear in their recollection that Councillor Harkins had not discussed the merits of the application with them, that he had not put pressure on them to recommend refusal of the application and that he had conducted himself with propriety in relation to the application. Overall I found their evidence to be clear, consistent and credible.

8. Having considered the information arising from my investigation, I found that Councillor James Harkins did not interfere in the planning process relating to a planning application from Curo Salus Limited and did not put pressure on officers of Renfrewshire Council Planning Department to recommend refusal of the application.

9. I concluded, therefore, that Councillor James Harkins had not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

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