The Ombudsman received a complaint that a Member (“the Member”) of Broughton Community Council (“the Community Council”) and Wrexham County Borough Council (“the Council”) had breached the Code of Conduct (“the Code”). It was alleged that during 2 Community Council meetings in 2024, the Member accused the Community Council and its members of being corrupt, regarding the way it had awarded a grass-cutting contract.
The Ombudsman started an investigation to consider paragraphs 4(b) (respect and consideration) and 6(1)(a) (disrepute) of the Code.
Information was obtained from the Community Council and the Council, including a copy of an Audit Wales report / audit opinion on the Community Council’s 2023/24 Annual Return. Witnesses, including the Complainant, were interviewed. The Member was also interviewed and provided an additional statement.
The investigation found the Member had accused the Community Council of being ‘corrupt’ in a public meeting. The Member said her use of the word applied to the Community Council’s processes and procedures in awarding the contract. In addition, she noted that Audit Wales had been critical of the Community Council’s process regarding the matter. The investigation also found the Community Council had addressed the Member’s concerns during the meeting, the Member would not have been aware of the Audit Wales report at the time of her comments, and it appeared she had made her comments with the individual bidders in mind, rather than the process or decision itself.
The Ombudsman determined that, whilst the Member’s comments were suggestive of breaches of paragraphs 4(b) and 6(1)(a) of the Code, enhanced protection under Article 10 would also apply, as they related to matters concerning council business, were not directed at any one person, and there was no evidence to suggest any media attention, wider circulation or impact of the event on individuals or the Council itself. In addition, the explanations provided to the Member about the Council’s decision were clearly set out for any objective observer to understand.
As such, the Ombudsman did not consider it was proportionate or in the public interest for any further action to be taken in relation to this matter.
The Ombudsman recommended that the Member take further training on the limits of her freedom of expression when allegations without foundation or supporting evidence are made, in order to protect the rights and reputation of others.