Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to investigate his complaint about the conduct of a parish councillor. We will not investigate this complaint as we have not seen any evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complained to the Council that a parish councillor had breached the code of conduct by publishing racist and homophobic statements on her social media accounts.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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

3. I considered:
• Mr X’s complaint to the Council and its responses; and
• the Council’s arrangements for dealing with complaints about breaches of the code of conduct
4. Mr X had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X complained to the Council that a parish councillor had posted racist and homophobic statements on social media.
6. The code of conduct says the parish council adopted the code to:

“…promotes and maintain high standards of behaviour by its members and co-opted members whenever they conduct the business of the council, including the business of the office to which they were elected or appointed, or when they claim to act or give the impression of acting as a representative of the council.”

7. The Council’s Monitoring Officer considered Mr X’s complaint, including copies of the social media posts. She also consulted the Council’s Independent Person.
8. The Monitoring Officer decided the councillor was not acting in her official capacity as a parish councillor when making the posts. Therefore, the code of conduct was not engaged.
9. She wrote to Mr X advising his complaint would not be considered further. She also advised that if he believed he is the victim of a hate crime; he should report the matter to the police.

Assessment

10. Complaints about the conduct of parish and town councillors are handled by the Principal Authority, which may be a county, district, unitary or borough council.
11. We may also be able to investigate complaints about the way the Principal Authority has investigated a complaint about parish or town councillors. But we would need to consider what we could ultimately achieve as we could not investigate the actions of the town or parish council itself.
12. The Monitoring Officer has followed the correct procedure. She considered the complaint and evidence provided by Mr X and consulted the Independent Person before deciding the parish councillor was not acting in her official capacity when making the statements on social media.
13. The Ombudsman cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong because the complainant disagrees with it. He must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because we have not seen evidence of fault in the process the Council followed when it considered his complaint about a parish councillor.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman