Minutes:
NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNCIL
STANDARDS AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE
HEARINGS PANEL
20 August 2024
Consideration
of Investigation Report regarding, and determination of, complaint NYC/SGC/2023/10
Summary
of Decision
On 20 August 2024 the Standards and Governance Committee
Hearings Panel, in consultation with the Independent Person for Standards,
considered a complaint by Councillor
Bryn Griffiths (“the Complainant”) that Councillor Tom
Jones (“the subject Member”) may have failed to follow North Yorkshire
Council’s Code of Conduct for Members:
Summary of Complaint
The Complainant submitted a written complaint email to the
Monitoring Officer on 22 May 2023. The complaint arises out of the full Council
meeting on 17 May 2023. The Complainant alleges that the during the vote on an
item of business, the subject Member forcibly pushed down another councillor’s
(X) hand when they were indicating their vote. The Complainant alleges that
this is in breach of paragraphs 1,3 and 7 of North Yorkshire Council’s Code of
Conduct for Members:
1. You must treat others with respect.
3. You must not bully, intimidate
or harass any person, or attempt to do so.
7. You must not conduct yourself in a manner which could
reasonably be regarded as bringing the Council into disrepute, or your position
as a Member into disrepute
The subject Member explained to the Monitoring Officer that
during the vote there was “an episode of confusion” arising from the issue
councillors were being asked to vote on. The subject Member, believing that the
councillor concerned was mistakenly raising their hand in favour of a motion,
“In a moment of youthful exuberance”, “lightly placed” his hand on the
councillor’s arm, informing them that the group was not voting in favour of the
matter. The councillor informed him that they were, and he then withdrew his
hand to allow them to vote. The subject Member confirmed that a complaint was
made by another councillor at the meeting and he
subsequently apologised to the Council chamber at the start of the afternoon
session and to the councillor concerned “which were both accepted”.
Assessment
The complaint was assessed by the Monitoring Officer in
consultation with the Independent Person for Standards on 28 July 2023, when it
was concluded that the matter should be referred for investigation.
Investigation
An investigation was undertaken by North Yorkshire
Council’s Internal Auditor, Veritau, and an Investigation Report was issued.
The Investigation Report found evidence of certain
potential breaches of paragraphs 1, 3 and 7 of the Code by the subject Member,
namely that:
i.
Councillor
Jones’ behaviour towards a fellow Councillor fell short of the courtesy
described in the Code and constitutes a breach of paragraph 1 of the Code;
ii.
Councillor
Jones’ behaviour in intervening during the other Councillor’s attempt to vote
constitutes a breach of paragraph 3 of the Code;
iii.
Councillor
Jones’ behaviour in using physical action to influence a vote could reasonably
affect the public’s confidence in him and other Councillors to make independent
decisions in the interests of their communities, where appropriate. The matter
has also attracted attention from the press which has been potentially damaging
to the Council. The Investigating Officer felt that this was evidence of a
breach of paragraph 7 of the Code.
Summary of Hearings
Panel Findings
The
Investigation Report was referred to, and considered by, the Standards and
Governance Committee Hearings Panel, in consultation with the Independent
Person, on 20 August 2024, when the Panel determined the complaint.
The Panel considered whether to exclude the press and
public during the consideration of the complaint and whether to maintain the
exempt nature of the documentation and the proceedings on the grounds that they
contain exempt information as described in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of
Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended), namely sensitive
personal information relating to individuals, and considered whether the public
interest in maintaining the exemption would outweigh the public interest in
disclosing the information.
After balancing the competing factors and representations,
the Panel resolved that, on the proposal of Panel Member Councillor Slater and
seconded by Panel Member Councillor Ireton, the public interest favoured this
matter being heard in exempt session and the exempt nature of the documentation
being maintained.
As a preliminary issue, the Independent Person clarified,
for transparency purposes, that he had met the Complainant before when they
were both trustees of Stokesley library but had no personal connection or
relationship to the Complainant and was therefore not declaring an interest.
The Panel agreed to combine Stages 1 (Findings of Fact) and
2 (Determination as to whether there has been a breach of the Code) of the
Hearings Procedure and consider both stages together.
The Panel considered the information presented and
representations made and found the following:
a)
That there
was physical contact between the subject Member and X.
b)
That it
was more than a light touch contact.
c)
That X’s
arm had been put down by the subject Member.
d)
That the
subject Member genuinely believed X was mistakenly voting the wrong way.
e)
That it
was not possible to determine how much force was used by the subject Member as
conflicting accounts had been put forward by the witnesses.
f)
That the
subject Member appeared to have been too heavy-handed in the way he reacted.
g)
That the
subject Member did not intend to bully, intimidate or
harass X, but rather had acted on impulse as he believed X was confused and
voting in the wrong way.
h)
That what
the subject Member did and how he did it was wrong; and that the subject Member
had accepted this from the outset and had shown remorse and apologised.
i)
That once
X advised they were intending to vote that way, the
subject Member did not intervene further.
j)
That the
subject Member had apologised to full Council and also
apologised to X for his actions.
Determination
The Panel concurred with the Investigating Officer’s
conclusions that there had been a breach
of paragraph 1 of the Code (respect) and paragraph 7 (disrepute) by the subject
Member.
More specifically, the subject Member’s use of physical
action to prevent X from voting in favour of a motion fell short of the
courtesy described in the Code and constitutes a breach of paragraph 1 of the
Code.
The Code of Conduct states Members can hold “fellow councillors to account and are
able to constructively challenge and express concern about decisions”. By using physical action to influence a
vote, the Panel agreed with the Investigating Officer’s view that the subject
Member’s challenge was not constructive and could reasonably affect the
public’s confidence in him and other Councillors to make independent decisions
in the interests of their communities, where appropriate. The Panel noted that
the incident had received attention in the press and could therefore be
potentially damaging to the Council. In all the circumstances this constitutes
a breach of paragraph 7 of the Code.
Regarding the allegation of a breach of paragraph 3 of the
Code (bullying, intimidation, harassment), the Panel did not find, on a balance
of probabilities, that there was any evidence of an intention on the part of
the subject Member to intimidate, bully or harass X, and did not find that the
subject Member had bullied X. However, whilst the subject Member may not have
intended to intimidate X by his actions, by using physical action to intervene
as a party whip, this could be perceived as an intimidating act and was
therefore in breach of paragraph 3
of the Code.
Sanction
The Panel considered whether a sanction should be imposed
and agreed that appropriate sanctions would be:
1.
The
subject Member apologise to full Council.
2.
The
subject Member apologise to X.
However, the Panel noted that the subject Member had
already undertaken these actions and had been subject to the scrutiny of a
standards investigation and Panel Hearing. In the circumstances, the Panel felt
the subject Member had already met the requirements of the appropriate
sanctions and no further action was required.
Recommendations
The Panel would wish to make the following recommendations
to Council political groups:
i. That Council political groups ensure that appointed whips
receive adequate training before carrying out their duties as whip.
Publicity
The Panel again considered the issue of exempt information
and any publicity regarding the outcome of the complaint and concluded that the
exempt nature of the documentation should be maintained; however, to satisfy
the legitimate public interest in the accountability of local authorities in
handling complaints, a Decision Notice should be published on the Council’s
website setting out the outcome of the complaint.
There is no right of appeal in relation to this
determination decision.
A complaint
may, however, be made to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (Home - Local
Government and Social Care Ombudsman) if
it is felt that North Yorkshire Council has failed to deal with the complaint
in accordance with North Yorkshire Council’s procedures.
JENNIFER NORTON
Deputy Monitoring Officer
20 August 2024