Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

There were no apologies/

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 21 October 2020.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 October 2020 were presented for consideration, and it was,

Resolved:

To approve and sign the minutes as a true and correct record.

To receive any declarations of disclosable interests, or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.

Councillors Ruth Hopkinson, Ernie Clark, Richard Britton, Stuart Wheeler and Fred Westmoreland noted that they were acquainted with the Subject Member for complaint COC131110, the complainant for complaint COC131452 and the Subject Member for complaint COC 130433, by virtue of them also being Wiltshire Councillors.

Councillor Hopkinson further declared that she was known to the parties for complaints COC131452, COC130429, COC130430, COC130432 and 130433.

Councillor Britton further declared that he was a member of the same political group as the Subject Member for Complaint COC131110.

To note the procedure and assessment criteria for the meeting.

The meeting procedure and assessment criteria for the meeting were noted.

To consider passing the following resolution:

To agree that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to exclude the public from the meeting for the business specified in Agenda Item Numbers 6 onwards, because it is likely that if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act and the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information to the public.

Paragraph 1 - information relating to an individual

It was,

Resolved:

To agree that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to exclude the public from the meeting for the business specified in Minute Numbers 41-46, because it is likely that if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act and the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information to the public.

Paragraph 1 - information relating to an individual

Preamble

A complaint was received from Fiona Fox (The Complainant) regarding the conduct of Councillor Andrew Davis (The Subject Member), a Member of Warminster Town Council. It was alleged that the Subject Member had breached the Code of Conduct through unprofessional demeaning, undermining and inappropriate behaviour at a public event in May 2019. The Complainant is the town clerk of Warminster Town Council.

Assessment

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the initial tests of the assessment criteria had been met, including that the Subject Member was and remains a member of Warminster Town Council, and that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment.

The Sub-Committee considered that it was unclear whether the Subject Member had been acting in their capacity as a Member of Warminster Town Council at the event at which the incident giving rise to the complaint occurred, or might be perceived to have been acting in that capacity particularly through the specific interactions with the Complainant, who is the clerk to the Town Council. Notwithstanding this, for the avoidance of doubt, the Sub-Committee progressed with the assessment.

The Sub-Committee therefore had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of that Code of Conduct. If the Sub-Committee concluded that the alleged behaviour would amount to a breach, then it would have to go on to decide whether it was appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the Subject Member and supporting information, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.

The Sub-Committee also considered verbal statements from both the Complainant and the Subject Member provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 19 November 2020.

Conclusion

The complaint involved a discussion and interaction between the Subject Member and the Complainant at a local event, which by both accounts became heated and confrontational. The parties disagreed on the nature and tone of various elements of the confrontation and who was responsible, however neither disputed that a heated confrontation had occurred.

The Subject Member is both a Warminster Town Councillor and Wiltshire Councillor, and the Complainant is the clerk to the Town Council, and the context of that relationship on any alleged incident was of relevance.

The relevant Code of Conduct did not contain specific references to disrespect or bullying, however, if the Subject Member was acting in their capacity as a Member, it would need to be considered if the alleged behaviour, stated by the Complainant to be ‘unprofessional, demeaning, undermining and totally inappropriate’, if proven, would be a breach of the Code through a failure to promote high standards of conduct or uphold the principles within the Code.

It was also noted that the complaint was submitted by the Complainant to the Town Council within 20 days of the incident in May 2019, but that due to errors in process by the Town Council it was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

In considering complaint COC131452 the Sub-Committee were satisfied that the initial tests of the assessment criteria had been met, including that the member was and remains a member of the relevant Council, and that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment.

The Sub-Committee therefore had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of that Code of Conduct. Further, if it was felt it would be a breach, whether it was still appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the Subject Member, and the report of the Monitoring Officer. The Sub-Committee also received written statements from the Complainant and Subject Member. Neither party was in attendance.

After discussion, it was,

Resolved:

In accordance with the approved arrangements for resolving standards complaints adopted by Council on 9 July 2019, which came into effect on 1 January 2020 and after hearing from the Independent Person, the Assessment Sub-Committee determined to refer the complaint for investigation.

Preamble

A complaint was received from Patsy Clover (The Complainant) regarding the conduct of Councillor Adrienne Westbrook (The Subject Member) of Melksham Town Council. It was alleged the Subject Member had breached the Code of Conduct by failing to have regard to the Nolan principles, specifically integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership, and failed to be open as possible about her decisions and actions, and failed to give reasons for those decisions and actions. This was alleged in respect of the suspension the Complainant from her role with the Town Council.

Assessment

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the initial tests of the assessment criteria had been met, including that the Subject Member was and remains a member of Melksham Town Council, that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment, and that they were acting in their capacity as a Member during the various alleged actions.

The Sub-Committee therefore had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of that Code of Conduct. If the Sub-Committee concluded that the alleged behaviour would amount to a breach, then it would have to go on to decide whether it was appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the Subject Member, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.

The Sub-Committee also considered written statements from both the Complainant and the Subject Member provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 19 November 2020. This included receipt of additional documentation under Paragraph 5.6 of the procedures for the meeting, provided by the Complainant. Neither party was in attendance.

The complaint was linked with complaints COC130430, COC130432 and COC130433 involving other Members of the Town Council relating to the same set of circumstances.

Conclusion

The complaint involved a series of actions of four Members, including the Subject Member, which it was alleged were not in accordance with council procedures, resulting in the unlawful suspension of the Complainant from her role as Deputy Clerk among other decisions, which were outside the  powers of the Subject Member, and in so doing and through other actions around the decision, breached the Code by not promoting or maintaining high standards of conduct.

The Subject Member contended that they acted in accordance with procedure following advice during a difficult situation.

The Sub-Committee noted that the allegations involved breaches of the standing orders of the Town Council. It noted that whilst a breach of those standing orders was not in of itself a breach of a Code of Conduct, it had to consider if the specific allegations of breaches of those orders in the alleged circumstances could, if proven, rise to the level of such a breach under the general principle of not promoting high standards of conduct. 

From the submissions it was apparent there had been a period of organisational difficulty for the Town Council where both the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

Preamble

A complaint was received from Patsy Clover (The Complainant) regarding the conduct of Councillor Geoff Mitcham (The Subject Member) of Melksham Town Council. It was alleged the Subject Member had breached the Code of Conduct by failing to have regard to the Nolan principles, specifically integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership, and failed to be open as possible about his decisions and actions, and failed to give reasons for those decisions and actions. This was alleged in respect of the suspension the Complainant from her role with the Town Council.

Assessment

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the initial tests of the assessment criteria had been met, including that the Subject Member was and remains a member of Melksham Town Council, that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment, and that they were acting in their capacity as a Member during the various alleged actions.

The Sub-Committee therefore had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of that Code of Conduct. If the Sub-Committee concluded that the alleged behaviour would amount to a breach, then it would have to go on to decide whether it was appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the Subject Member, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.

The Sub-Committee also considered written statements from both the Complainant and the Subject Member provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 19 November 2020. This included receipt of additional documentation under Paragraph 5.6 of the procedures for the meeting, provided by the Complainant. Neither party was in attendance.

The complaint was linked with complaints COC130429, COC130432 and COC130433 involving other Members of the Town Council relating to the same set of circumstances.

Conclusion

The complaint involved a series of actions of four Members, including the Subject Member, which it was alleged were not in accordance with council procedures, resulting in the unlawful suspension of the Complainant from her role as Deputy Clerk among other decisions, which were outside the  powers of the Subject Member, and in so doing and through other actions around the decision, breached the Code by not promoting or maintaining high standards of conduct.

The Subject Member contended that they acted in accordance with procedure following advice during a difficult situation.

The Sub-Committee noted that the allegations involved breaches of the standing orders of the Town Council. It noted that whilst a breach of those standing orders was not in of itself a breach of a Code of Conduct, it had to consider if the specific allegations of breaches of those orders in the alleged circumstances could, if proven, rise to the level of such a breach under the general principle of not promoting high standards of conduct. 

From the submissions it was apparent there had been a period of organisational difficulty for the Town Council where both the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

Preamble

A complaint was received from Patsy Clover (The Complainant) regarding the conduct of Councillor Vanessa Fiorelli (The Subject Member) of Melksham Town Council. It was alleged the Subject Member had breached the Code of Conduct by failing to have regard to the Nolan principles, specifically integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership, and failed to be open as possible about her decisions and actions, and failed to give reasons for those decisions and actions. This was alleged in respect of the suspension the Complainant from her role with the Town Council.

Assessment

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the initial tests of the assessment criteria had been met, including that the Subject Member was and remains a member of Melksham Town Council, that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment, and that they were acting in their capacity as a Member during the various alleged actions.

The Sub-Committee therefore had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of that Code of Conduct. If the Sub-Committee concluded that the alleged behaviour would amount to a breach, then it would have to go on to decide whether it was appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the Subject Member, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.

The Sub-Committee also considered written statements from both the Complainant and the Subject Member provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 19 November 2020. This included receipt of additional documentation under Paragraph 5.6 of the procedures for the meeting, provided by the Complainant. Neither party was in attendance.

The complaint was linked with complaints COC130429, COC130430 and COC130433 involving other Members of the Town Council relating to the same set of circumstances.

Conclusion

The complaint involved a series of actions of four Members, including the Subject Member, which it was alleged were not in accordance with council procedures, resulting in the unlawful suspension of the Complainant from her role as Deputy Clerk among other decisions, which were outside the  powers of the Subject Member, and in so doing and through other actions around the decision, breached the Code by not promoting or maintaining high standards of conduct.

The Subject Member contended that they acted in accordance with procedure following advice during a difficult situation.

The Sub-Committee noted that the allegations involved breaches of the standing orders of the Town Council. It noted that whilst a breach of those standing orders was not in of itself a breach of a Code of Conduct, it had to consider if the specific allegations of breaches of those orders in the alleged circumstances could, if proven, rise to the level of such a breach under the general principle of not promoting high standards of conduct. 

From the submissions it was apparent there had been a period of organisational difficulty for the Town Council where both the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

Preamble

A complaint was received from Pat Aves (The Complainant) regarding the conduct of Councillor Adrienne Westbrook (The Subject Member) of Melksham Town Council. It was alleged the Subject Member had breached the Code of Conduct by failing to have regard to the Nolan principles, specifically integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership, and failed to be open as possible about her decisions and actions, and failed to give reasons for those decisions and actions. This was alleged in respect of the suspension the Complainant from her role with the Town Council.

Assessment

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the initial tests of the assessment criteria had been met, including that the Subject Member was and remains a member of Melksham Town Council, that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment, and that they were acting in their capacity as a Member during the various alleged actions.

The Sub-Committee therefore had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of that Code of Conduct. If the Sub-Committee concluded that the alleged behaviour would amount to a breach, then it would have to go on to decide whether it was appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaint and supporting information, the response of the Subject Member, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.

The Sub-Committee also considered a written statement from the Complainant at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 19 November 2020. This included receipt of additional documentation under Paragraph 5.6 of the procedures for the meeting, provided by the Complainant. Neither party was in attendance.

The complaint was linked with complaints COC130429, COC130430 and COC130432 involving other Members of the Town Council relating to the same set of circumstances.

Conclusion

The complaint involved a series of actions of four Members, including the Subject Member, which it was alleged were not in accordance with council procedures, resulting in the unlawful suspension of the Complainant from her role as Deputy Clerk among other decisions, which were outside the  powers of the Subject Member, and in so doing and through other actions around the decision, breached the Code by not promoting or maintaining high standards of conduct.

The Subject Member contended that they acted in accordance with procedure following advice during a difficult situation.

The Sub-Committee noted that the allegations involved breaches of the standing orders of the Town Council. It noted that whilst a breach of those standing orders was not in of itself a breach of a Code of Conduct, it had to consider if the specific allegations of breaches of those orders in the alleged circumstances could, if proven, rise to the level of such a breach under the general principle of not promoting high standards of conduct. 

From the submissions it was apparent there had been a period of organisational difficulty for the Town Council where both the clerk and deputy clerk were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.