Disrepute?

Disrepute?

• – an “In My View” article by NIGEL WARD, considering the question “What kind of behaviour would render a Councillor guilty of bringing her/himself (and/or her/his Council) into disrepute?”

~~~~~

In the wake of my recent article “Too Much MONCKEY Business”  concerning the despicable conduct of former Yarm Town Council’s Chair/Mayor, Councillor Peter MONCK, I have been approached to offer an opinion on Councillors’ conduct more generally.

In the ‘good old days’ (prior to 2011), unacceptable conduct on the part of Councillors (whether elected by ballot, unopposed, or by co-option) was regulated (and disciplined) by the Standards Board for England.

Since the enactment of the Localism Act 2011, however, Principal Councils have been left to deal with errant Councillors ‘in house’. In effect, Parliament authorised Councils to ‘mark their own homework’. Some Councils have done so with greater probity than others. I live in North Yorkshire, where our ‘new’ unitary Council – North Yorkshire Council – managed, within its first year of operation, to avoid upholding any of the 174 Complaints lodged against members under its Councillors’ Code of Conduct.

Part of the explanation for this may lie in the fact that the Code is set out in such woolly terms. Take, for example, Article 7:

• You must not conduct yourself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing the Council into disrepute, or your position as a Member into disrepute.

What can that mean?

What would constitute “disrepute”?

Would former Councillor MONCK’s slanderous remarks concerning Councillors, made in the public forum of Full Council, qualify as “disrepute”?

Would ‘goosing’ the Town Clerk qualify as “disrepute”?

Would breaching the Human Rights Act 1998 qualify as “disrepute”?

What about transmitting an obscene and derogatory message, in the certain knowledge (unless the sender were a complete halfwit) that ALL electronic messages are susceptible to being copied and thereafter shared – to an almost infinitely extensive readership?

Readers may perhaps be surprised to learn that Stockton-on-Tees-Borough Councillor John COULSON (Yarm) [Con.] (pictured above), until recently the Chair/Mayor of Yarm Town Council (YTC), is one of four Councillors appointed to YTC in order to establish a quorum and thereby render YTC legally authorised to proceed with business – the others being:

• Councillor Andrew SHERRIS (Councillor for Yarm Ward)
• Councillor Elsi HAMPTON (Councillor for Southern Villages Ward)
• Councillor Stefan HOUGHTON (Councillor for Eaglescliffe East Ward)

The first item of business of any new Council is to elect a Chair who, in the case of a Town Council, may choose to style her/himself ‘Mayor’ – generally regarded as the town’s ‘first citizen’, and primary representative/ambassador for the town.

My Stockton ‘insider’ informs me that it is considered a foregone conclusion that Councillor John COULSON will be elected Chair/Mayor of the ‘re-born’ Yarm Town Council. The people of Yarm will have no voice in his ‘election’, though no doubt they would be hoping (to the extent that they give a damn one way or the other) for a Chair/Mayor who knows how to conduct himself and will carry out his duties with dignity and even-handedness.

So it occurs to me that, rather than dallying with the question “What constitutes ‘disrepute’?”, Councillors SHERRIS, HAMPTON and HOUGHTON may feel it incumbent upon them to lodge a complaint against their undesirable colleague, John COULSON, without delay, once they have had sight of Councillor COULSON’s electronic message to his discredited  predecessor, Peter MONCK, apparently referencing the three YTC Councillors whom MONCK imagined he could slander with impunity.