Members of Newcastle City Council’s audit and standards committee have been told they will not see any further details from a long-running investigation into bullying allegations against the former council leader. It comes as the final cost of the nine-month long investigation was revealed to be £79,552.
Members of the committee were unhappy that the city council had chosen not to make details of the investigation into allegations made against former leader Cllr Nick Kemp by senior officer Michelle Percy public. The local authority has previously said those involved had a “right to privacy” and that the report “should remain confidential”.
A copy of the report has since been seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service. Speaking at Tuesday’s meeting of the audit and standards committee, cllrs said they were unhappy at being asked to “rubber stamp” the report without having seen the full details.
It was stressed that there was no desire to contest the findings of the investigation by law firm Bevan Brittan, which found Cllr Kemp did not breach the code of conduct in the context of the “enhanced protection” under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to freedom of expression in a political context. Cllr Kemp’s actions were described in the report as sometimes “unreasonable” and having “created a tense atmosphere”, but it was found that there was “no evidence to suggest that the Councillor engaged in personal attacks”
Liberal Democrat cllr Greg Stone said: “We’re not looking to re-run, we’re happy to draw a line under it – but it raises issues with governance of the council that the committee needs to look at. We’re not comfortable with being asked to rubber stamp a process we haven’t been involved in and a report we haven’t seen.
“I’m concerned that it sets a precedent that the standards of this council and others is jettisoned by article 10. There are questions that need to be asked.
“We are not entirely satisfied with the position that we have been placed in. We are not looking to change the decision.”
Addressing the council’s monitoring officer, fellow Lib-Dem Cllr Mark Mitchell added: “If we don’t have the report we don’t have the information that is necessary. Are you going to give, at this committee’s request, a redacted copy of the findings and overall conclusions?”
Craig Winter, the council’s monitoring officer and assistant director of legal services, replied: “The report that has been brought today is within the council’s protocol for standards.
“Had there been a finding and a recommendation for the committee to consider, it would have been. The protocol is clear that the investigation is concluded and the outcome may be reported.
“It is not intended that there would be further detail from any of the investigation, in accordance with other reports where there has been no breach of the protocol.
“There was a wide range of other parties who were consulted. Personal information is in there which is part of the reason, in light of there not being a beach.
“There has been some sharing that is in breach of the confidential nature of the report. The obligations of confidentiality and to protect the information of all those who have been consulted still remains for the council and any third party who may or may not have that information.”
Despite this, cllrs were still keen to schedule a further meeting to delve into the issue further.
Labour’s Cllr Hazel Stephenson said: “I think it is important that it is recognised that we’re not asking to dispute the conclusions of the report in finding no breach of the code of conduct, nor do we ask to make any comment on the action of those involved.
“I think it is very important that there are lessons learnt from this that are taken into account. The only way we can do this is to go through the system.”
The committee’s independent chairman, Les Watson, agreed to arrange a further meeting to see what lessons could be learnt from the process.
He said: “The length of time must have had a detrimental effect on people involved. We have to look at alternatives to this while still ensuring the process is fair to all involved.
“It has to be done properly, but there must be lessons learnt.”
No date has been set for the meeting at this stage.
