Content

Decision of the Audit and Standards Sub-Committee (Hearings
Panel)
Wednesday 15 November 2023
 
Members of the
Panel:  Councillor Chris Sadler
(Chairman)
                                          
Councillor Richard Flatau
                                          
Councillor Alan Parker
 
 
Councillor Sadler (Chairman),
on behalf of the Panel, concluded that Claygate Parish Councillors
Sue Grose and Janet Swift had breached the Code of Conduct, based
on the following:
 
·          
The Panel had been very sensitive to the fact that
Claygate Parish Councillor Sue Grose was not present at the Hearing
and thanked her for sending in her representations and for Claygate
Parish Councillor Holt to make those representations on her
behalf.
 
·          
The Panel considered that the Investigator’s
report was thorough and objective. They agreed that there was
sufficient evidence, cross-referencing between the different
witnesses, to find that a breach of the Code of Conduct had taken
place and the conduct amounted to bullying by both Claygate Parish
Councillors.
 
·          
The Panel gave weight to the lengthy and detailed
report prepared by Mr. Lingard, the Investigator.  In particular they gave considerable weight to the
representations from Peter Finnis who provided a relevant training
course for members of Claygate Parish Council on 9 February
2023.   Until that day Mr. Finnis
was not known to the members of Claygate Parish Council and his
assessment of the situation that day came over as independent and
objective.
 
·          
The Panel thanked all those who participated by
providing various character references. 
However, it was noted that some of the remarks did not directly
relate to the incidents alleged by Mrs Harman and therefore were of
limited use.
 
·          
The Panel addressed the question of whether
political allegiances influenced the way that incidents were
perceived.  The Panel agreed that they
could find no evidence of Mrs. Harman having been politically
biased in her work. Clearly, working with Chairmen of different
political allegiances was a part of her job, and that would be
normal practice for someone in the Parish Clerk role.
 
·          
The Panel considered the suggestion that Mrs. Harman
might have been over-sensitive and had exaggerated the behaviours
she had experienced.  However, the Panel
felt this was belittling her ability to cope in the role that she
had taken on in March 2020. The problems had clearly built up over
a period of time from December 2020 to June 2023, when she
resigned. It was considered that the bullying was not a short-term
or one-off incident, but rather it came over as ongoing bullying of
the Clerk.
 
·          
The Panel expressed concern about the pettiness of
some of the incidents that had been raised in the
report.  Each of them, taken
individually, was not particularly serious, but the repetition of
them over time, and strength of the complaint about them had
resulted in matters getting out of all proportion.  It seemed that the two Claygate Parish Councillors
were looking for problems which in itself amounted to the bullying
of the Clerk.
 
 
Action to be taken
 
As the Panel had found that
Claygate Parish Councillors Sue Grose and Janet Swift had breached
the Code of Conduct, the following actions were agreed:
 
·          
publish the Panel’s findings in respect of the
Parish Councillors’ conduct;
 
·          
report its findings to the Parish Council for
information;
 
·          
invite an apology, in writing, from both Claygate
Parish Councillors, and that this be communicated within two weeks,
and copied to the Chairman of Elmbridge Borough Council’s
Audit and Standards Committee; and
 
·          
instruct the Monitoring Officer to arrange
appropriate training for both of the Claygate Parish
Councillors.
 
 
 
 
Given that the framework and
sanctions are light-touch and proportionate, there is no right of
appeal against a decision on a Code of Conduct
complaint.