Minutes:
The Hearing Sub-Committee considered complaint WC-ENQ00137 submitted by Mrs Carolyn Godfrey, a Corporate Director of Wiltshire Council, against Councillor Alan MacRae of Wiltshire Council. It had been alleged that Councillor MacRae had breached the Wiltshire Council Code of Conduct as a result of disclosing confidential information obtained through his role as a councillor to an individual who was not entitled to that information.
Following an initial assessment decision by Mr Frank Cain, Deputy Monitoring Officer, the complaint had been referred for investigation. That investigation had concluded that by divulging confidential information gained specifically from his role at Wiltshire Council, Councillor MacRae had failed to abide by the Nolan Principles of Leadership as required by the Code of Conduct, and therefore failed to maintain high standards in public office and improperly conferred a disadvantage. The conclusion of the investigating officer’s report was upheld by Mr Ian Gibbons, Monitoring Officer, and it had therefore be referred to the Hearing Sub-Committee for consideration and determination.
The Chairman welcomed all those present at the hearing and advised them of the procedure that was to be followed, as previously detailed during pre-hearing arrangements sent to all parties.
At the request of the Sub-Committee Mr Martin Davis, a Head of Service at Wiltshire Council attending on behalf of the complainant, then provided details on the requirements of confidentiality and potential implications of disclosure of confidential information in the circumstances of this case.
Mrs Marie Lindsay, Ethical Governance Officer and Investigating Officer, then presented her report to the Sub-Committee, which included details of the original complaint, supporting information, responses from and interviews with Councillor MacRae. The report detailed that the facts of the circumstances and nature of the disclosure of confidential information was not contested by Councillor MacRae, who had acknowledged his error in disclosing and cooperated fully with the investigation, and that his motivation for disclosing information was not in question.
The Sub-Committee then sought further details and clarity from the Investigating Officer.
Councillor MacRae was then given the opportunity to present his position to the Sub-Committee. He fully accepted that he had made a serious error in making the disclosure and apologised for doing so, noting that as a result he was no longer responsible for work at the council in the same area as at the time of disclosure, work he cared a great deal about.
The Parties were then given the opportunity to make concluding statements.
The Sub-Committee then withdrew at 13:30 with the Committee Lawyer, Democratic Services representatives and Mr Stuart Middleton, Independent Person supporting the Sub-Committee.
The Sub-Committee returned at 14:15 and detailed their decision.
Resolved:
Inaccordancewiththeapprovedarrangementsforresolvingstandards complaintsadoptedbyCouncilon26June2012,whichcameintoeffecton1 July 2012and after hearing from the Independent Person, the Hearing Sub-Committee decided:
That Cllr MacRae’s actions were in breach of the Wiltshire Council Code of Conduct by failing to maintain high standards in public office and that by his actions he improperly conferred a disadvantage and so failed to abide by the Nolan principles.
Accordingly, the Sub-Committee resolved:
a) To recommend to Cllr MacRae’s group leader (and Leader of the Council) that he not be reappointed to any committee or position of responsibility that involves receipt of confidential information regarding the service area of his disclosure of information.
b) That this recommendation be included in the minutes of the Standards Committee.
Reason for Decision
The Hearing Sub-Committee considered the facts of the case as detailed in the Investigating Officer’s Report, including the original complaint, response of the subject member and supporting information on the nature and extent of the alleged breach, as well as the statements of the Investigating Officer and Cllr MacRae at the Hearing.
The circumstances of the alleged breach had involved Cllr MacRae disclosing confidential material he had obtained through his position as a councillor to a party who was not entitled to the information. Both complainant and investigating officer had emphasized that there was no question as to Cllr MacRae’s motives in that the disclosure had been an error of judgement, and that Cllr MacRae had accepted this and cooperated fully with the investigation.
As the facts were not disputed the Sub-Committee concluded that Cllr MacRae had disclosed confidential information, and they considered that this amounted to a breach of the Code of Conduct as detailed above.
When considering possible sanctions, the Sub-Committee had regard to the serious nature of the breach arising from disclosure of confidential material. Although Cllr MacRae’s motivations were not in question and he had been removed from the positions he had held at the time of breach, the nature of the disclosure had very serious implications that he should have been aware of as a result of his position.
The Sub-Committee therefore concluded that in addition to censure Cllr MacRae’s group leader should be informed they were of the view he should not be reappointed to a similar committee or position where he might be in receipt of similar information.
The Sub-Committee also noted the wider implications for the council
and its members regarding responsibilities with confidential
information. They recommended to the Standards Committee that
within 3 months of taking office, all councillors should be
mandated to attend training specifically in respect of
confidentiality requirements, with group leaders informed where
this had not taken place, with the recommendation that no
councillor should be appointed to any committee or position of
responsibility without completing said training.