Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s failure to require a councillor to stand down from their position on a Council committee following their breach of the Members Code of Conduct. We will not investigate the complaint because there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, says the Council should require a councillor, who I refer to as Councillor A, to stand down from their position on a Council committee following Councillor A’s breach of the Members Code of Conduct. She says Councillor A’s position is untenable and that the Council should insist the councillor steps down immediately.

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, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Ms X and gave her the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms X complained to the Council that Councillor A had breached the Members Code of Conduct because of comments the councillor had made about others.
5. In accordance with Council procedure, at the initial stage of the standards process the Council’s Monitoring Officer consulted with the Independent Person about what action to take in relation to the complaint. Having done so the Council then wrote to Ms X to tell her that her complaint might be able to be resolved informally with a public acknowledgement by Councillor A of the distress the comments had caused and the publication of a public apology.
6. Dissatisfied with this proposal, Ms X sent her views on it to the Council. The Monitoring Officer considered what she, and other complainants had said, as well as comments from Councillor A. Having done so the Council decided an informal resolution was the preferred outcome and it wrote to Ms X to explain its decision.

Assessment

7. We do not offer a right of appeal against a council’s decision on member conduct complaints. What we look at is whether there was fault in the way the Council considered the complaint.
8. In this case I do not consider an investigation would be likely to find evidence of fault. Ms X’s complaint and her comments were considered and the decision taken was to resolve matters informally. I understand Ms X may not agree with this decision but its merits are not open to review by us.
9. Moreover, the outcome Ms X seeks is not one we can achieve and, while I understand she has been distressed by what has taken place, her injustice is limited.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman