Issue - meetings

The Investigating Officer (IO) introduced Wilkin Chapman’s report, and the supporting evidence bundle. The IO summarised the complaint made against Councillor Harrison by Councillor Bailey, who alleged that Councillor Harrison posted a screenshot of a private text message conversation between Councillor Bailey and Councillor Harrison, accompanied by the words ‘oh dear’ in a comment made on a Facebook post.

Councillor Harrison posted a text exchange between himself and Councillor Bailey on 10 March 2024 in the comments section of a post by Councillor Ben Green on Councillor Green’s page. The original post is a video of Councillor Ben Green on the verge of the A1. Councillor Green was highlighting the financial reserve of £60,000 which had been voted through into the budget for 2024/25 at the Council meeting on 29 February 2024. The amendment to the budget had been proposed by a member of the opposition groups and seconded by Councillor Green. 

The complainant alleged breaches of paragraphs 1.1, ‘Respect’ and 4.1, ‘Confidentiality’ of the Council’s Code of Conduct). He also alleged breaches of three of the seven Nolan Principles (the seven Principles of Public Life). The Investigator explained that the Nolan Principles underpinned the Code of Conduct but did not form part of it. Allegations must relate to behaviours under the Code and the IO confirmed that they were able to investigate any behaviours which they felt were relevant. They therefore investigated against the behaviours of disrespect, confidentiality and disrepute, under parts 1, 4 and 5 of the Code of Conduct.

The IO outlined the principles of freedom of expression and the relevant European and UK legislation, alongside Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The right to freedom of expression was enhanced in the area of political commentary, but mere personal abuse did not attract the higher protection. Freedom of speech may be curtailed if it was lawful to do so to protect the rights and freedoms of others; there were several pieces of UK and European caselaw which supported this which were referenced in the IO’s report.

Both Councillor Bailey and Councillor Harrison were interviewed as part of the evidence gathering process. These interviews were part of the evidence bundle; Councillor Bailey had signed his as a correct record, but Councillor Harrison had refused to sign his as he did not agree with the conditions put forward by Wilkin Chapman.

In the view of the IO the sharing of text messages by Councillor Harrison constituted a breach of the Code of Conduct under ‘respect’, ‘confidentiality’, and ‘disrepute’

Respect

The IO felt that the revealing of the text message conversation was clearly meant to belittle Councillor Bailey alongside the posting of a sarcastic emoji. However, Councillor Harrison was making a political comment. If the exchange had originally been made in public, it would have been fully protected under political freedom of expression. However the issue was impacted by the issues of data protection.

The IO felt that the text message exchange was a private conversation.  ...  view the full decision text for item 5.