Agenda item

A complaint had been submitted by Councillor William Seabrook, the Complainant, regarding the conduct of Councillor Harry Urquhart the Subject Member, both of West Dean Parish council. 

The Complaint concerned allegations that the Subject Member failed to declare an interest at council meetings regarding a planning matter and took part in discussions about the development in question. It was also alleged that the Subject Member demonstrated disrespect and harassment toward fellow Members and the Clerk of the Parish Council, causing the resignation of the Clerk and the Complainant. Other aspects of the allegations involve improper use of their position as Chairman and pre-determination of council business.

The Complainant did not specify which part of the Code they believed had
been breached, however the following sections were included for consideration:

2.2 I do not harass any person.
9.1 I register and disclose my interests

Preamble

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the initial tests of the assessment criteria had been met, including that the Subject Member was and remained a member of West Dean Parish Council and the Council had a Code in place, along with a resolution to abide by the Local Government Association’s Model Code of Conduct. It was confirmed the council did have a code in place and both had been provided for the assessment, therefore the Sub-Committee was satisfied 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 or alternative resolution.

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 the verbal statement from the Subject Member provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting. 

Discussion

The Complaint involved allegations that the Subject Member had failed to declare an interest in a planning matter, showed disrespect and harassment towards members of the council and the council’s clerk, displayed improper use of their position in office, acted dishonestly in statements made about the former clerk and had made decisions without the backing of the rest of the council.

The Sub-Committee considered the allegations, noting that at the time which they were said to have occurred, the Subject Member was the elected Chairman of the Parish Council. 

The Sub-Committee noted that the Complainant stated they had resigned as a result of the alleged actions of the Subject Member and that the Complainant was later re-elected and currently remained on the council.

The Subject Member contends that they have not breached the LGA Code of Conduct regarding the non-disclosure of an interest, as the development site was not in their ownership.  

The Subject Member stated that it was their belief that the complaint originated from the former Clerk and that no evidence had been provided to support the Complainants allegations of harassment towards the former Clerk. In addition, the Subject Member did not consider his communication with another parish council to confirm the employment status of the former clerk amounted to harassment.

The Sub-Committee noted that there had been no complaint made by the Clerk.

The Sub-Committee noted a lack of detail in the complaint, regarding what the Subject Member allegedly said and did, to result in the Clerk and the Complainant resigning.

The Sub-Committee noted that the Subject Member in his role of Chairman, had sought advice from the Wiltshire Association of Local Councils (WALC) to enable the correct processes to be followed with regards to the recruitment of a new Clerk. 

The Subject Member clarified that following the resignation of the Clerk, the Council formed a panel to carry out the recruitment process to select a new Clerk and that a decision was then taken by the Council. 

The Sub-Committee considered the Planning Sub-Committee of the Council, which had been set up jointly with a neighbouring council. The membership of this Sub-Committee included the Complainant and the former Clerk’s Husband.

The Sub-Committee considered the Codes provide by the council and noted that the LGA Model Code had not been formally adopted, but that a resolution had been made by the Council to ‘abide’ by it. The Sub-Committee requested that council be alerted to this, as it may wish to formally adopt the LGA Model Code in the future.

The Sub-Committee noted that there appeared to be a difference of opinion among members of the Council with regards to the planning application for Glebe Farm. Whilst it was not unusual for members of a parish council to hold differing opinions on matters for consideration, it was recognised that planning matters could cause frustration and personal disagreements, which may then escalate.

Conclusion

The Sub-Committee noted that West Dean Parish Council had not formally adopted the LGA Model Code of Conduct, giving the false impression that two codes were in force, which may result in confusion for the elected members when following the rules on making declarations of interest.

The Sub-Committee found that the alleged behaviour, if proven, would not amount to a breach of the West Dean Code of Conduct, and felt that should the Council formally adopt the LGA Model Code of Conduct, the provision of some training by the new Clerk on the sections around declaration of interest and discussions around open and honest decision making, may benefit the Council as a whole in moving forward. 

The Sub-Committee found no evidence to suggest that the Subject Member had carried out a harassment campaign or brought the Council into disrepute by his actions whilst in the role of Chairman.

The Sub-Committee agreed that any bad feeling between members of the Council appeared to have been focused around the Glebe Farm Planning matter and that since that time the Subject Member had stepped away from the role of Chairman and the council was functioning without further incidents.

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 take no further action in respect of the complaint.