Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Renfrewshire Council > LA/R/860

Note of Decision Web Version

Complaint no. LA/R/860 concerning an alleged contravention of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct by Councillors Audrey Doig and Brian Lawson of Renfrewshire Council

1. Complaint number LA/R/860 alleged a contravention of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct (“the Code”) by Councillors Audrey Doig and Brian Lawson (“the respondents”).

2. It was alleged that the respondents had contravened the Code, in particular, the key principle of Duty in section 2.

3. The person complaining (“the complainant), alleged that, at a meeting of the Education Policy Board held on 18 December 2008, Councillor Doig stated that she was going to vote to close South Primary School because Labour had voted to close a school in her area and that Councillor Lawson stated that he had made his mind up six weeks ago that he was going to vote in favour of the closure of South Primary School. The complainant questioned the point of conducting a consultation exercise when councillors had already made up their mind to close the school. He also stated that it was the respondents’ duty to look after the interest of the public purse and the community and not to have personal disagreements.

4. Councillor Doig denied making the statements attributed to her and Councillor Lawson could not recall making the statements attributed to him. The Council officers who were present at the meeting of the Education Policy Board on 18 December 2008 could not recall the specific comments made by the respondents and the informal notes taken by them at the meeting did not contain any information regarding the comments made by the respondents. There was, therefore, no independent evidence from officers regarding the statements made by the respondents.

5. The consultation exercise relating to South Primary School was completed on 7 November 2008 and the results were available to the respondents prior to the Education Policy Board meeting on 18 December 2008, as part of the report prepared by the Director of Education and Leisure. Consequently, the respondents had this information before the future of South Primary School was considered and voted upon. 

6. The key issue in considering the complaint was that the Council complied with its statutory duty (in terms of process and approach) to consult with parents before taking a corporate decision to close South Primary School. The Code of Conduct does not impose a rigid set of rules to which councillors must adhere when formulating their views on policy matters. As a matter of fact, however, both respondents fully took into account the outcome of the consultation exercise before making up their minds regarding the future of the school.

7. I had no reason to doubt the veracity of the respondents’ explanations that they did not make the statements attributed to them (Councillor Doig) or could not recollect doing so (Councillor Lawson) and considered that the evidence was to the effect that they acted reasonably and properly in reaching their own decisions on the closure of the school. I should add that, even if they had made the comments, I would not have regarded their conduct as such as amounting to a breach of the key principle of Duty. Having regard to all of these matters, I found that the respondents had not breached the Code.

8. Having considered the information that arose from my investigation, I concluded that Councillors Audrey Doig and Brian Lawson had not contravened the Councillors’ Code of Conduct.

D Stuart Allan

Chief Investigating Officer

Forsyth House

Innova Campus

Rosyth Europarc

Rosyth

KY11 2UU

23 September 2009