The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a local councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, has complained about the actions of a local councillor. Mrs X says the councillor breached the Council’s code of conduct as they spoke at a planning committee meeting despite having a disclosable pecuniary interest in the application being considered.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Local Authorities have a duty to designate a Monitoring Officer to ensure the lawfulness and fairness of authority decision making. The Monitoring Officer must ensure that the authority, its officers and members maintain the highest standards of conduct. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about code of conduct breaches.
The Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We are also unable to investigate or comment on the actions of the councillor complained about. We can consider the Council’s administration of a code of conduct complaint. However, where a decision has been made in line with the correct procedure, taking account of the relevant evidence, the Ombudsman will generally not criticise the decision, even if the complainant does not agree with it.
In this case, I am satisfied the Monitoring Officer dealt with the matter in line with the Council’s rules for code of conduct complaints before deciding not to take further action. The Monitoring Officer considered Mrs X’s concerns and the evidence available. They also consulted the Independent Person before making their decision. The Monitoring Officer agreed the councillor should not have spoken at the committee meeting but said this was not the fault of the councillor as they were acting on incorrect advice from officers.
I understand Mrs X disagrees with the decision not to take any further action against the councillor she complained about. But the Monitoring Officer was entitled to use their judgement to decide further action against the councillor was not necessary. As the Monitoring Officer dealt with Mrs X’s concerns in line with the Council’s criteria for code of conduct complaints, it is unlikely I could find fault.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman