Information on Investigations

Which Sector? > Local Authorities > Scottish Borders Council > LA/SB/217 & 218

Note of Decision Web Version

Complaint nos. LA/SB/217 & 218 concerning alleged contraventions of the Councillors' Code of Conduct by Councillor Andrew Farquhar and Councillor Kenneth McCartney of Scottish Borders Council

1. Complaint numbers LA/SB/217 and LA/SB/218 alleged contraventions of the Councillors' Code of Conduct ("the Code") by Councillors Andrew Farquhar ("the first respondent") and Councillor Kenneth McCartney ("the second respondent").

2. It was alleged that the respondents had breached the terms of the key principle in paragraph 2.1 of the Code relating to Respect, and paragraph 2.2 of the Code which also deals with the general principles upon which the Code is based.

3. With regard to the first respondent the person complaining ("the complainant") alleged that on 14 June 2005 Councillor Farquhar in his capacity as a Scottish Borders Councillor attended a meeting of Hawick Community Council. (The complainant at that time was a member of Hawick Community Council.) He alleged that "A point was reached on the agenda to discuss ‘Town Issues'. I had proceeded to raise a matter in this connection when quite suddenly I was subjected to what appeared to me an attack by Councillor Farquhar – I was sitting down at the time, when he walked over to me and threw a Hawick Newspaper towards me, this brushed the side of my head, whilst doing so he made several derogatory remarks to me before storming out of the hall, he later returned but offered no apology to myself."

4. With regard to the second respondent the complainant alleged that on 14 June 2005 Councillor McCartney in his capacity as a Scottish Borders Councillor attended the same meeting of Hawick Community Council. He alleged that "I was raising the point at the meeting under ‘town Issues' when I was subjected to a quite unacceptable outburst from Councillor McCartney, he continually interrupted my presentation, and though I attempted to proceed in a civil manner, I was faced with constant heckling from the Councillor who was asked on several occasions to sit down by the Vice Chairman of the Council." and "By his actions I was prevented from completing my presentation and therefore he did not listen actively to what I had to say. Instead of taking the opportunity to consider all the circumstances of what I was attempting to say – he continually interrupted me, attempting to speak over me, spoiling my presentation. Then Councillor McCartney subjected all present to what I would term a general tirade, after which he stormed out of the meeting in a rage."

5. It was clear that the background to these complaints was the failure of Mrs Alexandra Elliot in May 2005 to be re-elected as the Honorary Provost of Hawick. It seemed that a number of her fellow Community Councillors did not believe that the outcome of the election was a true reflection of public opinion in Hawick. This in turn lead to a deterioration in relationships between Community Councillors in Hawick and the town's elected Scottish Borders Councillors, (those Scottish Borders Councillors having been members of the Provost Council and having voted for Councillor McCartney as Honorary Provost).

6. With regard to Councillor McCartney it did not seem unreasonable that he felt it necessary to explain his position at the meeting of the Community Council in June 2005 when he was confronted with a "motion of no confidence in the elected Councillors" and a statement being read by the complainant in which he was alleging that the Scottish Borders Councillors in Hawick had failed to comply with the requirements of the Councillors' Code of Conduct. I was satisfied that there was no evidence that Councillor McCartney's conduct at that meeting was improper in any way and certainly did not amount to a breach of any of the provisions of the Councillors' Code of Conduct. I was satisfied that he was entitled to attempt to make a point of order, to say what he said, and to leave the meeting when he did. His conduct did not amount to a failure to treat the complainant with the appropriate level of courtesy and respect.

7. With regard to Councillor Andrew Farquhar I found no evidence that at the meeting of the Community Council in June 2005 he had said anything to the complainant which was disrespectful. Indeed there appeared to be no evidence available as to what if anything Councillor Farquhar had said to the complainant at that meeting other than his, Councillor Farquhar's, reference to the headline in the Hawick newspaper on the other hand, Councillor Farquhar's action in relation to the newspaper had been inappropriate and impolite. However, although his action had been inappropriate I did not consider that it was sufficiently disrespectful to amount to a contravention of section 2 of the Code. Furthermore, there had been no allegations of misconduct under any specific section of the Code (such as section 3 which deals with general conduct) other than section 2 which deals with the key principles rather than the specific rules of conduct.

8. Having considered all information, I concluded that Councillor Andrew Farquhar and Councillor Kenneth McCartney had not contravened the Councillors Code of Conduct.

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