REVIEWDECISION NOTICE
NO BREACH OF THE CODE
Reference: / CCN014/13Complainant: / Mr David Hall
Subject Member: / Mrs Christine Hordley, formerly a Councillor at Linkinhorne Parish Council
Person conducting
the Review: / Matthew Stokes, Corporate Governance, Property and Commercial Group Manager
Date of Review: / 17 July 2013
Complaint
On 17 July 2013the Monitoring Officer considered a request to review the complaint fromMr David Hallconcerning the alleged conduct ofMrs ChristineHordleyformerly a Councillor atLinkinhorne ParishCouncil. A general summary of the complaint is set out below:
That the subject member, whilst canvassing as a candidate for election to Cornwall Council, sought to promote the use of financial inducement by a fellow parish councillor to reduce opposition to the latter’s wind turbine development plans, including in relation to any appeal against the refusal of planning permission, and by doing so has pre-judged in favour of any future wind turbine plans at Knowle Farm.
The complainant suggests that by her conduct the subject member has:
- improperly used her position as a Councillor to confer an advantage on another; and
- has brought her office into disrepute.
The complainant also refers to pre-judging.
Decision
The subject member has not breached the Code of Conduct of Linkinhorne Parish Council.
Reasons for the Decision
In reaching this decision I have had regard to the representations provided in connection with the complaint, both from the complainant and the subject member, including that submitted in relation to the request for this complaint to be reviewed, and the views of the Independent Person.
Sufficient information has been submitted for this complaint to be reviewed without the need for a formal investigation or for further information to be sought by any other means.
Whilst I agree with the decision made by Mr Mansell at the assessment stage I am of the view that this complaint could have been dismissed more concisely. This remains the case notwithstanding the additional points the complainant makes in his request for review. The reasons for this are:
(i)the complaint is largely based on hearsay, conjecture and assumption;
(ii)no substantive evidence was provided with the original complaint to demonstrate a breach of the Code of Conduct;
(iii) even considering the complaint on the basis of the information provided by the complainant without having regard to the views of the subject member, there is nothing in the behaviour alleged that could reasonably be considered to amount to a breach of the Code of Conduct.
The submissions contained in the request for review do not change my view.
This complaint has been correctly assessed at its initial consideration and I concur with that assessment. There has been no breach of the Code of Conduct by the subject member in relation to the matters set out in this complaint.
The Code of Conduct complaints process is not the correct mechanism for addressing concerns about planning applications. The statutory regime relating to development control is there for that purpose. I am not suggesting that the complainant sought to improperly use the Code of Conduct complaints process but the point is an important one to make.
Irrespective of my conclusion that there has not been a breach of the Code of Conduct of Linkinhorne Parish Council, there is no public interest argument for taking any other action or referring the complaint for investigation with a view to ascertaining whether there is any merit in the complaint. The subject member is no longer a Councillor, the Parish Council is not the Local Planning Authority and any further applications will be determined on their merits and on policy grounds by the Local Planning Authority.
I do not consider there to be any justification in devoting public resources to a complaint that has no substantive basis.
What happens now?
This decision notice is sent to the complainant, the member against whom the allegation has been made and the Clerk to Linhinhorne Parish Council.
Additional help
If you need additional support in relation to this or future contact with us, please let us know as soon as possible. If you have difficulty reading this notice we can make reasonable adjustments to assist you, in line with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 2000.
We can also help if English is not your first language.
pp Matthew Stokes
Corporate Governance, Property and Commercial Group Manager
On behalf of the Monitoring Officer
Date:18 July 2013