Summary: Mr X complains two Council members had pre-determined their vote on the Council’s Local Plan as they had recorded media announcements prior to the decision being made, giving their views on its approval. The Ombudsman will not investigate as it is unlikely he will find fault by the Council and the injustice to Mr X is not sufficient to warrant his involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about pre-determination by two Council members on a vote on the Local Plan. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of the complaint he made to it about this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault, we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or the injustice is not sufficient to warrant our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered what Mr X said in his complaint. I sent Mr X my draft findings on the complaint and I have considered the comments he made in response, in reaching this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X gave a presentation at a Council meeting on his views on the Local Plan. Mr X says he was shocked to learn afterwards that before the meeting, two Council members had recorded video clips to announce the Local Plan had been passed.
6. Mr X feels this shows the councillors had pre-determined their votes on the Plan and also discourtesy to those who attended the meeting.
7. Mr X complained to the Council about this and is unhappy it has decided not to take the complaint further.
8. Mr X seeks apologies from the councillors and for their votes to be rescinded.
9. In its complaint response to Mr X, the Council acknowledges that prior to the meeting where the Local Plan was approved, two councillors filmed short clips which were to be used announcing the approval, should the vote go that way. The Council says this was done for efficiency purposes and that had the Plan been rejected, another pre-prepared media statement would have been issued.
10. The Council has examined the process leading up to the meeting where the Local Plan was approved and does not consider there is evidence that the councillors approached the meeting with a closed mind, or showed pre-determination.
11. In liaison with its Independent Person, the Council also decided there was no breach of its Code of Conduct.
12. The Council advised Mr X that though it had passed the Local Plan, it was yet to be adopted and Mr X could make representations about it to be considered in the independent examination of it by the Planning Inspectorate.

Analysis

13. We cannot challenge the Council’s decision on Mr X’s complaint in the absence of fault in the way it was considered and I have not seen such fault. That Mr X disagrees with the Council’s assessment does not provide grounds for us to investigate.
14. I do not consider the injustice to Mr X from his complaint is significant or sufficient to warrant our involvement. Mr X still had the right to make his representations about the Local Plan to the Planning Inspectorate, notwithstanding what took place prior to or at the Council meeting.
15. We have no remit to make individual councillors issue apologies.
16. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

17. My decision is that the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely he will find fault by the Council and he cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman