We received a complaint that a Member (“the Member”) of Abertillery & Llanhilleth Community Council (“the Council”) breached the Code of Conduct (“the Code”).
The Complainant, a fellow councillor, was concerned about various contacts the Member had made with members of the community in which it was alleged that the Member implied impropriety on the part of the Council and fellow councillors to others. The Complainant was concerned that the Member had therefore failed to treat others with consideration and respect by making unfounded suggestions to community members. In addition the Complainant was concerned that by suggesting wrongdoing at the Council, the Member brought the Council into disrepute. It was also alleged that the Member implied members of the community were involved in some wrongdoing connected with the Council.
We gathered information from the Complainant, some witnesses to events and from the Member. Overall, it appeared that the member had made some unnecessary and unwarranted remarks which were not in keeping with the standards expected of councillors as leaders in the community. While the Member had a right, under Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, to hold opinions and express criticisms, even if controversial, this right was not absolute and had to be balanced with the rights of others to their reputations and to be protected from unwarranted criticisms and to protect public confidence in democratic institutions.
Overall, we considered there was some evidence to suggest the Member had been talking to members of the community suggesting wrongdoing at the Council, when there did not appear to be any strong legitimate basis for such suggestions. We considered such behaviour was suggestive of conduct which may be capable of bringing the Council into disrepute contrary to Paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Code and suggestive of a failure to treat his fellow colleagues with consideration and respect, in breach of paragraph 4(b) of the Code.
The impact on the local community appeared to have been minimal given the Member’s views did not appear to have been shared widely across the community. Given this, the fact that there appeared to be no evidence of personal gain for the Member and due to the limited evidence to suggest breaches of the Code, we decided it was not proportionate or in the public interest, on this occasion, to take further action.
The Member was, however, advised that he must consider carefully in the future the impact which making serious and unfounded suggestions of wrongdoing at the Council has upon both the individuals involved, the reputation of the Council more widely, and on the public’s trust in local democracy.
The Member was also advised that should further complaints of a similar nature be brought to us in the future about the Member, the outcome of this matter would be considered further.