Agenda item

Over the last few weeks there have been a couple of occurrences in a two member ward where only one has been informed of events/projects taking place in their respective wards.  On both occasions the Plaid Cymru councillors were 'kept in the loop', but the Labour councillors were not.  Each ward, Tyisha and Glanymor, has one Plaid Cymru and one Labour councillor.

In respect of openness, transparency and equality I ask the leader what he is going to do to try and ensure there are no further occurrences of this nature.

“Over the last few weeks there have been a couple of occurrences in a two member ward where only one has been informed of events/projects taking place in their respective wards.  On both occasions the Plaid Cymru councillors were ‘kept in the loop’, but the Labour councillors were not.  Each ward, Tyisha and Glanymor, has one Plaid Cymru and one Labour councillor.

In respect of openness, transparency and equality I ask the Leader what he is going to do to try and ensure that there are no further occurrences of this nature.”

Response by Councillor Emlyn Dole, Leader of the Council:

“Firstly can I seek to exonerate the two Plaid Cymru Councillors involved in the instances that you raise.  The first is around an invitation sent to two ward councillors to attend the re-opening of Waddle Court, the former St. Paul’s.  I was also copied in on the invitation by e-mail and did attend.  You are right in a sense that Councillor Keri Thomas doesn’t appear on that e-mail list of invitees but years ago Councillor Keri Thomas informed the Council that he no longer wanted to use his computer or receive e-mail or correspondence through the computer which means that he has to have everything sent to his home address by mail.  The invitation to that particular event was sent by an officer to Councillor Thomas by mail.  It was sent in font size 22 because he specifically requested that it be sent in a larger font so that it would be readable.  His refusal to use a computer is his decision and the decision as to whether he chooses to open or not to open his mail is also up to him but that invitation was sent by mail.  His fellow Councillor in Tyisha, Councillor Jeff Owen, is an honest and hardworking councillor who on countless occasions, regardless of political persuasion or colour, has given his fellow Councillor lifts to and from meetings both in Llanelli and in Carmarthen.  How is that for openness, transparency and equality.  The second incidence you raise is down to an officer error which resulted in an immediate apology, and rightly so, to Councillor Louvain Roberts. If I can just explain what happened in chronological order so that this Council and the people watching can make their own judgement.  The whole thing concerns proposals to accommodate a wakeboarding franchise at North Dock and the consultation with local members on that proposal. On 29^th February this year an officer gets in touch with Councillor Winston Lemon amongst others to ask for their comments but due to an oversight omits to include Councillor Louvain Roberts in the e-mail.  That very same day, within less than 3 hours, Councillor Winston Lemon opens his e-mail and notices that his fellow ward member, Councillor Louvain Roberts, hasn’t been copied in so once again, regardless of political colour or persuasion, he sends his fellow councillor notice of the issue and the fact that she wasn’t copied in.   How’s that for openness, transparency, integrity and equality.  The following day Louvain credits Winston for copying her in and thanks him and then contacts the officer in question and outlines her hope that there wasn’t a political motive behind that oversight.  She then gets a response from the officer apologising and assuring her that it was indeed merely an oversight and apologises a second time.  The Leader of the Opposition asked me what I intend to do.  In response to the first case what I intend to do is commend all our staff who go that extra mile in their dealings with members, thanking them for going above and beyond their call of duty often and praise their openness and transparency and sense of equality. I will also commend Winston, what an example to all councillors in two member wards, in notifying his fellow councillor of that e-mail.  In response to the second case, I will be reminding all staff to ensure that when we deal with wards where there are two members that they take special care that both are consulted.  Contrary to the implied suggestion, I am absolutely proud of the behaviour of both Winston and Jeff towards their Labour counterparts. Both of them are a credit to Plaid Cymru and to their respective wards and I would like to commend them publicly for their behaviour and their professionalism in both cases.  Let me deal with the darker side of this question.  It is officers of the Council that send out invitations and reports to members.  The standard and level of questioning by the present Leader of the Opposition does not surprise me but it does disappoint me.  I am genuinely concerned about the tenure of his questioning as it implies that officers here are applying political bias and somehow favouring one political group over and above the other. That’s a very serious allegation to make.  I’m glad to have been able to throw light on both instances and be able to share that knowledge with him although why he would want to raise it in a televised public forum is beyond me.  So can I try to put this as diplomatically as I can. His question implies that officers of this Council are somehow politically biased.  Such an implied allegation does a great disservice to the hardworking and diligent officers of this Council who are directed by the Constitution that we all abide to that they show no political favour to any political grouping in their dealings with members. Indeed they are instructed to remain neutral.  The Leader of the Opposition’s suggestive line of question not only calls their neutrality into doubt but also their professionalism and I am concerned that this puts the Leader of the Opposition in breach of the Members Code of Conduct.  Under Part 2 under General Provisions Part 5 it states “You must not do anything which compromises or which is likely to compromise the impartiality of those who work for or on behalf of your Authority“.  As it is specifically officers who send out invitations and reports it calls their impartiality into question and I would ask the Monitoring Officer for her comments on that.”

At this point the Monitoring Officer explained that complains about members’ conduct are matters which should be referred to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales. Officers are similarly subject to a Code of Conduct and if there is information which suggests that there are officers who are acting politically or are not impartial then a complaint should be made to the Council in order that it can be investigated.

Councillor Jeff Edmunds asked the following supplementary question:-

“What I am putting across is factual.  I am not blaming anybody.  It is about public perception.  My question wasn’t about the two Plaid Cymru councillors and I totally accept the fact that they both give Councillor Keri Thomas lifts to Council.  It is about the fact that these things have occurred.  My second question is basically about openness and transparency and public perception when things like this happen.  With regards to the governance review and the fact that we want to be the most open and transparent Council in Wales, how does he believe this would affect the public perception, how would they perceive that perhaps Labour are being kept in the dark.”

Response by Councillor Emlyn Dole, Leader of the Council:-

“I have explained both instances that there is no conspiracy here to keep Labour out of the loop.  The suggestion that Plaid Cymru councillors were kept in the loop but Labour councillors were not is one that suggests that something is wrong.  My concern is not about the conduct of members as I have exonerated both Plaid Cymru members. They did absolutely the right thing in the context of a two member ward. The implication here is that officers, the people who send out reports and invitations, are somehow politically biased.  That’s the insinuation behind it and that’s what concerns me because it absolutely is not the case and I would defend with my last breath the professionalism and neutrality of our officers.”