Audit & Standards Committee
Agenda Item 12
Date of meeting: 28 June 2022
Report of: Monitoring Officer
Contact Officer: Name: Victoria Simpson, Senior Lawyer – Corporate Law
Tel: 01273 294687
Email: Victoria.Simpson@brighton-hove.gov.uk
Ward(s) affected: All
Background
Member complaints: the challenges
4.1 Complaint M/2021 remains at preliminary assessment stage, following the circulation of a draft Report to the complainant (themselves an elected councillor) and the subject member by external investigators.
4.2 As prevously reported, complaints F1 and O1/2021 concerned different comments made by the same member about Council officers via social media. The progression of that complaint was impeded by the relevant subject member’s unwillingness to engage with the complaints process. The matters complained of have now both been assessed as having potential to amount to a breach of the requirement in the Code of Conduct for Members that members treat others (including but not only officers) with respect. The Monitoring Officer’s view has been communicated to the subject member, who has been asked to apologise for their comments and to delete them. At the deadline for publication of this Report, a response was awaited from the subject member to this suggestion that the matter be resolved in this way, via informal resolution. It will be the subject of a further report to this Committee.
4.4 Complaint I/2021 alleged misconduct by a councillor in their ward which was robustly denied, despite multiple assertions over time by the complainant that they did have evidence that the events complained of had taken place. This complaint has now been determined by the Monitoring Officer on the basis that it should not be progressed to formal investigation as there was not, in fact, sufficent evidence to support that complaint. That outcome at preliminary assessment stage has been notified to both parties.
4.5 Complaints M1 and N1/2021 (made by the same complainant, although directed differently) make the same allegation against a single elected member, namely that they failed to treat the complainant with respect during an interchange on social media. The Monitoring Officer agreed with the Independent Person that informal resolution would be the best outcome on the facts and so (much as in complaints F1 and O1/2021 above) the subject member has been approached and informed of the view taken, and asked to apologise and delete the conversation. Again: a further update will be provided in due course.
4.6 Complaint A/2022 also concerned comments by an elected member about a complainant on social media. This too was dealt with in the same way as the four complaints described above, by indicating the Monitoring Officer’s view that these complaints did have potential to amount to a breach, and that specific remedial action by the complainant was sought as a necessary step to resolve the complaint informally.
4.7 Complaint K1/2021 alleged disrespect by an elected member at a Committee meeting as well as when posting on social media. The allegations in that very detailed complaint covered some of the same ground as the complaints which had been subject to prior decisions by the Council and then (following a challenge) by the Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman, neither of which considered that any action was merited. A decision has now been made to determine this new complaint on the basis that there is insufficient evidence to support that complaint: a decision whch has been communicated to the parties.
4.8 Of the fourteen complaints against elected members flagged up in the last Update report as being new, nine of them relate to the social media comments made by a single elected member who did not respond when alerted to the complaints: E, G, H, I, J, K, L, M & N/2022. The first of those complaints (E/2022) was considered by the Monitoring Officer and those other persons who reviewed it to have potential to amount to a breach of the Code. The subject member concerned has been notified of this and has been asked to apologise for the posts and to delete them within a specified window of time as a means of informally resolving matters in a proportionate way. An update will be provided to this Committee regarding this complaint in due coure.
4.9 The other nine complaints listed in para 4.8 concerned exchanges made by the same subject member on a single topic affecting perceptions of Brighton & Hove City Council’s schools. It was noted that – although some of the posts involved reposting an article in the national press which had been the subject of a correction by the Council – there was no evidence that the article had been reposted after the correction was issued. That said, other communications by that member on the same topic were considered to have potential to give rise to a breach of the Code of Conduct and the subject member was alerted to that. They were at the same time told informed (as were the complainants in all of the matters) that the Monitoring Officer had taken the view at preliminary assessment stage that – although resource challenges had resulted in a decision that a wide-ranging formal investigation was not deemed to be proportinate and necessary in the public interest – the comments by the relevant subject member about a named journalist had been referred for formal investigation. That formal investigation will be the subject of a further report to this Committee in due course.
4.10 Complaint F/2022 concerned the same subject matter as the complaints listed in para 4.8. However it differed insofar as it concerned comments in the press by a different elected member which were considered to use language deemed to be derogatory with potential to cause offense to others. That complaint has been informally resolved, the relevant member having indicated that they had no intention of causing offence. They indicated that they regretted any harm caused and would take steps not to use the terms complained of in future.
4.11 A complaint alleging disrespect toward a member of the public exhibited via social media (B/2022) has been treated as having been withdrawn and meriting no action, despite the complainant seeking to reverse their previous indication that they did not wish to progress matters.
4.12 Notwithstanding the resource directed to this area, some complaints remain outstanding despite efforts to actively progress them up to the deadline for this Report. Complaint O/2022 – which alleged that an elected member failed to treat a member of the public with respect in a public place – has now been referered to one of the Council’s two Inpdendent Persons, who has been asked to take a view at preliminary assessment stage. Meanwhile efforts to obtain answers to key preliminary enquiries remain ongoing in relation to the two complaints made by different elected members against a third elected member regarding that member’s conduct when acting as Chair at a meeting of one of the Council’s Committees (C & D/2022 respectively).
Member Complaints received since the last Update in January 2022
4.13 Complaint P/2022 was made by one elected member against another and concerns assertions made in a newspaper article which are alleged to have failed to treat the complainant with respect. That complaint has been referred to the Independent person so that the Monitoring Officer may take their views into account when making his decision at preliminary assessment stage.
4.14 Finally, Complaint Q/2022 concerns allegations of verbal abuse and harassment made by an elected member’s neighbour which are robustly denied. That complaint remains at preliminary assessment stage and will be the subject of further report to this Committee, as will P/2022.
Supporting Documentation
None