Minutes:
Preamble
A complaint was received from Councillor David Cavill (The Complainant), Trowbridge Town Council, regarding the conduct of Councillor Antonio Piazza (The Subject Member), also of Trowbridge Town Council. It was alleged that the Subject Member had breached the Code of Conduct through a series of comments which were not mutually supportive of other members and officers and failed to restrict criticism of officers to private communications. It was alleged the pattern of behaviour was contrary to the requirements of the Town Code of Conduct.
The complaint was considered alongside Complaint COC130489, which involved the same Subject Member and alleged facts.
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 Trowbridge Town Council, and that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment.
The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the nature of the discussions of council business in various mediums was such that the Subject Member was acting in their capacity as a Member.
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, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.
The Sub-Committee also considered a verbal statement from the Complainant provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 21 October 2020. The Subject Member was not in attendance.
Conclusion
The complaint involved a series of critical comments on social media and other forums by the Subject Member regarding Trowbridge Town Council as a body and other Members of that Council. The Complainant is also a Member of the Town Council.
The Complainant considers that the alleged comments amount to a breach of the Code via breaches of the Member/Officer Protocol of the Town Council, which states at Para 1.5 that it is an extension of the Code of Conduct. This confirms that a breach of the provisions of the protocol may constitute a breach of the Code, but this is not automatic.
In respect of Paragraph 5.4 of the Protocol on being mutally supportive, the heading of Paragraph 5 specifies this applies to relationships between ‘Members at Committees and Officers at Meetings of the Council’.
Notwithstanding that many of the provided examples took place outside of meetings and committees, though often about meetings and those involved with them, the Sub-Committee took account of the strong legal protections afforded to free expression, in particular political expression. Therefore, even if it were proven there was a breach of the Code, via a breach of the Protocol, it would need to be considered if this would be sufficient to overcome the high threshold to justify interference with the Subject Member’s right to freedom of expression.
The Sub-Committee did not consider that the alleged statements and comments, or their manner, if proven, rose to a level which was capable of being a breach of the Code. Although highly critical and with disputed accuracy, there did not appear to be a level of excessive or unreasonable personal attack or bullying or intimidatory behaviour in a way which would not promote or support high standards of conduct or the Nolan principles. Although the reasoning for disagreement might be disputed, the Subject Member was open and transparent for the reasons in making their comments.
The Complaint was considered alongside Complaint COC130489, which involved the same Subject Member and alleged facts.
The Sub-Committee noted, from the materials and from other matters, that Trowbridge Town Council appeared to be currently engaged in matters of considerable, intense and emotive debate, which had had a number of consequences on its political operation and cooperation amongst its Members. That debate appeared to be escalating and was increasingly combative and divisive, to the potential detriment of the operation of the council and the community it serves.
Whilst the threshold for interference with political expression was, for good reason, high, it was important that Members be appropriately and accurately briefed when reporting on factual matters, that criticism of officers or officer performance in particular did not cross the line into excessive or unreasonable personal attacks, and to note that while the requirement to promote high standards of conduct did not and should not preclude robust political debate and disagreement where appropriate, councils could be more effective when, where possible, there was less confrontational discussion and operation.
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 take no further action in
respect of the complaint.