Summary: Mr X complains about the outcome of his complaint about the conduct of a local councillor who Mr X says posted false information about a local traffic scheme on social media. Mr X is opposed to the scheme and says he has been deeply upset by the councillor’s actions. We will not investigate as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the outcome of his complaint to the Council about the conduct of a local councillor who Mr X says posted false information about a local traffic scheme on social media. Mr X is negatively impacted by the scheme and feels deeply upset that an elected official should post, what he feels to be, false information.

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, 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)
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 and sent him my draft decision on it for his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X complained to the Council about two social media posts made by a councillor about a Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) scheme in his area. Mr X complained that one post provided a link to false information and the other was demonstrably untrue. Mr X is unhappy that no action is to be taken against the councillor. Mr X wants the councillor to be forced to retract the posts and to apologise for sharing false information.
6. Mr X says he is negatively impacted by the LTN scheme and has been deeply upset by what he considers to be an elected official sharing false information.
7. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint with reference to its procedure for dealing with complaints about member conduct. The Council advised Mr X that currently its code of conduct does not provide advice to members on their use of social media in the context of their roles as elected officials. As such, the Council decided not to take any further action in respect of the Council member’s actions. Guidance will however be drafted to be considered by the Council’s Ethics Committee regarding members’ use of social media and how this relates to the code of conduct.

Analysis

8. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint with reference to its procedure and made a decision it was entitled to make. As per paragraph 3, unless there is evidence of fault in its consideration, we cannot question the merits of its decision. I have not seen evidence of such fault.
9. We have no remit to sanction Council members and so we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.
10. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman