Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Scottish Borders Council > LA/SB/206

Note of Decision Web Version

Complaint no. LA/SB/206 Concerning an alleged contravention of The Councillors' Code of Conduct by Councillor Hugh Wight of Scottish Borders Council

1. Complaint number LA/SB/206 alleged a contravention of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code") by Councillor Hugh Wight ("the respondent").

2. It was alleged that the respondent had contravened the Code, in particular paragraph 2.1 relating to Duty and, specifically, the duty to represent a constituent's interests conscientiously.

3. The person complaining ("the complainant") alleged that in not responding to an enquiry by the complainant the respondent was in breach of his duty as a councillor in paragraph 2.1 of the Code of Conduct in that he had not represented the complainant's interests conscientiously.

4. Examination of Councillor Wight's action on receipt of the complainant's enquiry showed that he acted expeditiously in seeking the information requested by the complainant from the Education Department and in replying to the complainant.

5. There was then an interval of just over one month before the respondent raised with the Director of Corporate Services, the delay by the Education Department in providing the information requested. Bearing in mind that Councillor Wight recognised that the Education Department would probably find it difficult to provide the information in the form requested and that he had taken the opportunity, on two occasions, to apprise the complainant, albeit informally, that he was awaiting the information from the Education Department I found that he acted reasonably in seeking to obtain the information from the Education Department.

6. There was a further interval of just under one month between the date on which Councillor Wight received information from the Education Department and the date on which he passed this information to the complainant ie after he received intimation that a complaint had been lodged. He acknowledges that he should have forwarded the figures to the complainant immediately but explains that he held them back to try further research which, ultimately, was unsuccessful. While it would have been preferable for Councillor Wight to have forwarded the information from the Education Department to the complainant more timeously, with a note recognising the limitations of the figures, I found his explanation for holding back the information to be credible and his action reasonable.

7. The complainant had alleged that Councillor Wight did not respond to his enquiry and that he did not represent his interests conscientiously. Based on my investigations I found that, far from not responding to his enquiry, Councillor Wight went to considerable lengths to obtain the information requested by the complainant. The nature of the information sought was such that he was wholly reliant on the Education Department for providing it and, for a variety of reasons, the Department itself had difficulty in sourcing the information in the form requested.

8. Having considered the information that arose from my investigation I concluded that Councillor Hugh Wight had not contravened the Councillors' Code of Conduct.

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