Investigation report attached.
Minutes:
Members considered whether Councillor Batty was acting in his capacity as a councillor at the Estates Committee meeting on 20 February 2024. Members felt that the knowledge of the situation and the context that Councillor Batty demonstrated at that meeting could only have been gained from his position on the parish council and the item that was under discussion was a parish council business. They also took into account case law, namely the case of Paul Richardson and another vs North Yorkshire County Council and the First Secretary of State, which concluded that “a member of an authority attending a council meeting could not divest himself of his official capacity as a councillor in a representative capacity, simply by declaring his attendance in a private capacity. He is still regarded as conducting the business of his office”. It was therefore agreed that, on the balance of probability, Councillor Batty had been acting in his capacity as a parish councillor during the Estates Committee and the code of conduct was therefore engaged.
In considering whether Councillor Batty’s words and behaviour at the meeting breached the parish council’s code of conduct, members felt that he had been disruptive, rude and disrespectful towards officers of a partner organisation when he accused them of telling lies and also towards the chair in using phrases such as “a load of nonsense”, “shut up”, “idiot”. They felt that some of his words were targeted and personal and lost the protection of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of expression) as a consequence. They felt this behaviour also brought his office into disrepute.
In relation to the allegation that Councillor Batty had an undisclosed pecuniary interest when he spoke at the meeting, whilst members felt his interest wasn’t pecuniary in nature, they felt that on the balance of probabilities he did fail to declare an interest as a resident living next to the park which was central to the debate, and failed to withdraw from the meeting after speaking as required by the code of conduct, and remained in the meeting to influence the outcomes of the debate.
It was therefore moved by Councillor Cook, seconded by Councillor Williams and
RESOLVED – on the balance of probabilities
(i) Councillor Batty was acting in his capacity as a parish councillor at the meeting of the Estates Committee on 20 February 2024;
(ii) Councillor Batty breached paragraph 2.3.1 of the Groby Parish Council code of conduct by failing to treat his fellow councillors, in particular the chair, with respect due to the language he used and his disruptive behaviour;
(iii) Councillor Batty breached paragraph 2.3.2 of the code of conduct by failing to treat officers of a partner organisation with respect in his behaviour and speech;
(iv) Councillor Batty breached paragraph 2.16 of the code of conduct due to his disorderly and disruptive behaviour falling below the standard expected of a councillor and thereby bringing the role of councillor and the parish council into disrepute;
(v) Councillor Batty breached paragraph 2.19 of the code of conduct by failing to declare an interest in the business under discussion and not withdrawing from the meeting but trying to influence the discussion to his own advantage, thereby attempting to use his position improperly to the advantage of himself and disadvantage of others;
(vi) Councillor Batty did not fail to disclose a pecuniary interest;
(vii) Councillor Batty breached paragraph 2.30 of the code of conduct in not disclosing a registrable interest as a resident of a property adjacent to the park under discussion.
Having identified breaches of the code of conduct, the committee considered relevant sanctions to impose. It was moved by Councillor J Crooks, seconded by Councillor Cook and
RESOLVED –
(i) Councillor Batty be requested to issue a formal apology to the chair of the parish council and to those who were subjected to his disrespectful behaviour;
(ii) Councillor Batty be required to attend additional training on the code of conduct and standards required of a councillor;
(iii) A formal letter be issued to Councillor Batty highlighting the failings in his conduct;
(iv) Groby Parish Council be recommended to remove Councillor Batty from any positions of responsibility within the parish council;
(v) The committee’s decision be published on the council’s website and a press release be issued outlining the nature of the complaint and the committee’s decision;
(vi) Groby Parish Council be recommended to censure Councillor Batty.
Reasons for the decision to impose sanctions:
(a) Issuing an apology for the disrespectful behaviour may help to ease relationships and ensure disrepute to the council is not caused;
(b) Relevant training would prevent a recurrence of such behaviour;
(c) Highlighting the failings in a letter would support the subject member to understand why his behaviour was unacceptable as a learning tool for improvement;
(d) The subject member’s behaviour demonstrated that he was not currently a suitable candidate to hold a position of responsibility within the parish council;
(e) In accordance with the intentions of the Localism Act 2011, the subject member needed to be accountable by the public for his behaviour, and publication of the decision is the most appropriate way of raising awareness of his actions.