The Ombudsman received a complaint that a Member (“the Member”) of Llanllyfni Community Council (“the Council”) had breached the Code of Conduct (“the Code”) by failing to declare an interest in Council meetings when the future use of a piece of land was discussed. A Community Hub (“the Hub”), were said to be behind a scheme which proposed that the land be used for allotments. Several local people including the Complainant were opposed to the field being used in this way. It was alleged that the Member held a personal and prejudicial interest when the land was discussed at Council meetings, as she was a Director of the Hub and also a member of the Hub’s Management Committee. When an interest was declared it was alleged that she failed to leave the meetings. The Complainant also alleged that the Member’s decision to support the allotment scheme was not impartial.
The Ombudsman’s investigation considered whether the Member had breached the Code by failing to declare a personal and prejudicial interest, and whether she had brought her office or authority into disrepute.
Information was obtained from the Council, and the Complainant and the Member were interviewed.
The Ombudsman found that the actions of the Member were suggestive of breaches of the Code in that she had failed to declare a personal and prejudicial interest at Council meetings. It was felt that insufficient consideration has been given to the requirement to take into account a personal interest when the business of the authority relates to a registered society, given that this was the Hub’s status and that the Member held a position of general control or management. It was also considered that the Member failed to consider that perspectives as to the associated public interest could be very different, and the Code would require the Member to consider this in deciding whether their personal interest may also be prejudicial. This led to instances where the Member failed to declare a prejudicial interest or follow the requirements of the Code when a prejudicial interest is held. However, the Ombudsman also noted that advice given by the Council was not as clear as it could have been.
The Ombudsman was not persuaded that these events had, or were likely to have, an effect on the reputation of the Council as a whole, because the Member’s involvement did not appear to have an adverse impact on the eventual outcome.
The Member had not received training on the Code since 2017 before the events that gave rise to the complaint. The Member signed an undertaking to abide by the Code before she took up her role. This should not have been taken lightly and should have alerted her to the fact that she was under a duty to understand the Code in order to abide by it.
The Ombudsman found that although the Member’s actions were suggestive of a breach of the Code the limited impact of her actions and the mitigation provided by the unclear advice she received, meant it would not be in the public interest to take further action.
The Ombudsman found that under Section 69(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 2000 no action needed to be taken in respect of the matters investigated.