Issue - meetings

Council is asked to consider the recommendation of the Ethical Governance & Personnel Committee.

Having declared a personal interest which might lead to bias in this item, Councillor Boothby left the meeting at this juncture.

In presenting the report of the Ethical Governance & Personnel Committee to Council, the Monitoring Officer emphasised that the only matter for consideration was the recommendation to remove Councillor Boothby from his positions on council bodies and outside bodies as this was only within the remit of Council. It was also reported that the decisions of the Ethical Governance and Personnel Committee and the Appeals Panel (which did not uphold Councillor Boothby’s appeal against the decision) had been unanimous. It was noted that Councillor Boothby had subsequently resigned from the Ethical Governance & Personnel Committee.

Some members felt that, whilst not wishing to condone Councillor Boothby’s behaviour, to remove him from his positions on committees would be detrimental to residents within his ward. Members were reminded that Councillor Boothby would not be precluded from attending and speaking as ward councillor.

Councillor Williams wished it to be recorded that he felt the length of time for which the sanction would be imposed was excessive.

It was requested that a report on the standards process be produced to allow members to consider whether they wished to continue delegating decisions on complaints to the Ethical Governance & Personnel Committee.

It was moved by Councillor Hall and seconded by Councillor Camamile that the recommendation within the report to remove Councillor Boothby from his positions on council bodies and outside bodies be approved and that he be not permitted to sit as substitute on any council body or outside body for the remainder of this term of office (to May 2019).

Councillor Bray, along with five other councillors, requested that voting on the motion be recorded. The vote was taken as follows:

Councillors Allen, Bessant, Camamile, Hall, Kirby, Ladkin, Lay, MacDonald, Morrell, Nickerson, Smith, Surtees, Sutton, Wallace and Ward voted FOR the motion (15);

Councillors Bill, Bray, Cartwright, Crooks, Hodgkins, Hollick, Lynch, Nichols, Taylor and Witherford voted AGAINST the motion (10);

Councillors O’Shea, Roberts and Williams abstained from voting.

The motion was therefore declared CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – Councillor Boothby be removed from his positions on council bodies and outside bodies and be not permitted to sit as substitute on any council body or outside body for the remainder of this term of office (to May 2019).

Councillor Boothby returned to the meeting at 7.20pm.

Determination hearing in relation to complaint 2017-06.

Members gave consideration to the report of the independent investigator in relation to a complaint about Councillor Chris Boothby which had been referred for a hearing by the Ethical Governance & Personnel Committee on 29 November 2017.

The committee was informed that the subject member had indicated he would not be in attendance at the meeting and they agreed to continue in his absence as it was highly unlikely, given comments he had made, that he would attend at a later date should they decide to adjourn.

The investigator, Mr Maxey, was in attendance and presented his findings. He outlined the allegations that, on 6 June 2017, there was an exchange between Councillor Boothby and the complainant concerning where the complainant had parked their car. Mr Maxey referred to the three allegations within the complaint:

(i)    That, in challenging the complainant’s parking, Councillor Boothby breached the requirement in Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council’s code of conduct for Members in that he failed to ‘strive to create respectful and courteous relationships with everyone you come into contact with as a Member’ (paragraph 1(b)) and the Nolan Principles (paragraph 1(a) and appendix 1 of the code);

(ii)   That Councillor Boothby challenged the complainant’s entitlement to a blue badge, in breach of the same provisions of the code;

(iii)  That the manner in which Councillor Boothby spoke to the complainant breached the same provisions of the code.

The investigator had found that, on the balance of probabilities, there had been a breach of (i) and (ii) above but that, due to it being a case of the complainant’s word against the subject member’s, on the balance of probabilities there had not been a breach of the code of conduct in relation to point (iii) above.

The investigator explained that Councillor Boothby had felt that he had a role to challenge the complainant as part of his role as Executive member for Housing & Community Safety, whereas he had no more responsibility to do so than any other member of the public. He also explained that the issue for discussion was not whether the complainant had parked in an inconvenient or obstructive manner, but about how Councillor Boothby had treated the complainant and how he had challenged the complainant’s use of and entitlement to a blue badge.

Members then asked questions of Mr Maxey in relation to the details of the case to ascertain the relevant facts. This part of the hearing concluded at 10:45am and Mr Maxey left the meeting.

Members then considered the information they had received and the options available to them.

In reaching a decision, members referred to the following:

·         Agreement with the investigator’s report that Councillor Boothby had breached the code of conduct in relation to two elements

·         Agreement with the investigator’s report that Councillor Boothby had not, on the balance of probability, breached the code of conduct in relation to the third element of the allegation

·         The disappointing fact that Councillor Boothby had not attended the meeting to make  ...  view the full minutes text for item 283

Report of the investigator attached, along with appendices.

The committee gave consideration to the report of an independent investigator into allegations of a breach of the code of conduct. The options available to the committee were outlined and it was noted that if it was felt that the councillor had not breached the code, a decision of no action would be appropriate, but if it was felt that there was a case to answer, a hearing would be necessary. The option of taking ‘other action’ was also discussed.

The Independent Person, present at the meeting, commended the comprehensive and thorough report and supported the recommendation of the independent investigator that a hearing be held.

It was moved by Councillor Cartwright and seconded by Councillor Camamile that there was a case to answer and a hearing should be held which would allow all parties to put their case forward. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was carried and it was unanimously

RESOLVED – the matter be referred for a determination hearing of the Ethical Governance & Personnel Committee.

Fact finding report.

Having declared a personal interest which might lead to bias in this item, Councillor O’Shea left the meeting at 7.45pm.

Consideration was given to a fact finding report. The committee felt that the matter did fall under the code of conduct, may have been a breach of the code of conduct, and was of sufficient seriousness to be investigated. It was also felt that an independent external investigator should be appointed.

It was moved by Councillor Nickerson, seconded by Councillor Witherford and

RESOLVED –

(i)            Complaint 2017-06 be referred for investigation;

(ii)           An external investigator be sought.