Agenda item

In September 2022 and in response to a series of code of conduct violations, group leaders from South Kesteven district council signed the Local Government Association campaign statement on Debate not Hate. This is reprinted in full below:

"The intimidation and abuse of councillors, in person or otherwise, undermines democracy; it can prevent elected members from representing the communities they serve, deter individuals from standing for election, and undermine public trust in democratic processes. Seven in 10 councillors reported experiencing abuse and intimidation over the last 12 months and councillors reported feeling that abuse is becoming more common and increasing in severity. Debating and disagreeing with one another has always been, and will continue to be, a healthy part of democracy. However, the right engagement matters and abuse and intimidation crosses the line into dangerous territory and has no place in politics.”

This Council reaffirms the principles of the LGA “Debate Not Hate” campaign.

Councillor Graham Jeal proposed the following motion:

In September 2022 and in response to a series of code of conduct violations, group leaders from South Kesteven district council signed the Local Government Association campaign statement on Debate not Hate. This is reprinted in full below:

"The intimidation and abuse of councillors, in person or otherwise, undermines democracy; it can prevent elected members from representing the communities they serve, deter individuals from standing for election, and undermine public trust in democratic processes. Seven in 10 councillors reported experiencing abuse and intimidation over the last 12 months and councillors reported feeling that abuse is becoming more common and increasing in severity. Debating and disagreeing with one another has always been, and will continue to be, a healthy part of democracy. However, the right engagement matters and abuse and intimidation crosses the line into dangerous territory and has no place in politics.”

This Council reaffirms the principles of the LGA “Debate Not Hate” campaign.

In moving the motion Councillor Jeal highlighted the diligent handling of Councillor Code of Conduct complaints, where there had been breaches of the Code found against two Councillors.

An amendment to the motion was moved and seconded and accepted by the mover of the original motion. It therefore formed part of the substantive motion:

In September 2022 and in response to a series of code of conduct violations, group leaders from South Kesteven district council signed the Local Government Association campaign statement on Debate not Hate. This is reprinted in full below:

"The intimidation and abuse of councillors, in person or otherwise, undermines democracy; it can prevent elected members from representing the communities they serve, deter individuals from standing for election, and undermine public trust in democratic processes. Seven in 10 councillors reported experiencing abuse and intimidation over the last 12 months and councillors reported feeling that abuse is becoming more common and increasing in severity. Debating and disagreeing with one another has always been, and will continue to be, a healthy part of democracy. However, the right engagement matters and abuse and intimidation crosses the line into dangerous territory and has no place in politics.”

Since the election of the leader of the council in early 2024, there has been a significant increase in the number of code of conduct complaints – many of which have been deemed so serious to merit external investigation and hearings. With bullying, intimidation and widespread abuse at unprecedented levels in South Kesteven District council, the leader of the council has failed to uphold the principles of the LGA Debate not Hate campaign which he signed as a group leader in 2022. For these reasons, this motion proposes the removal of the leader of South Kesteven District Council until such time as a new leader can be elected by full council.

A point of order was raised regarding the validity of the motion. The Monitoring Officer advised that in his view the amendment was linked to the original motion and therefore could be accepted.

An attempt to move an amendment which removed the additional text was ruled out as it would negate the substantive motion.

The following views were raised during the introduction to, and debate on the new substantive motion:

-          If the amendment passed the SKDC coalition group would not seek to put forward a candidate to replace the Leader of the Council.

-          The Leader of the Opposition commented that the amendment had not been moved for political gain.

-          No breaches of the Councillor Code of Conduct were found in respect of ‘bullying’.

-          In the view of one Councillor all Councillors were tainted in the way Councillor Code of Conduct complaints were handled by the Leader of the Council. The Leader had to be held accountable as these complaints occurred during his tenure.

-          Another Councillor expressed the view that the Leader had offered the opportunity to both sides of the Council Chamber to sit down and talk amicably about differences. Behavioural standards within both sides of the Council Chamber had fallen short of where they should have been.

-          It was not believed that there was collective hatred towards any Councillor. Many current Councillors and prospective candidates would think twice about standing for office having viewed comments on social media.

-          None of the five Code of Conduct Hearing Review Panel held recently had found any guilt on behalf of the Leader of the Council, who had tried to tackle Code of Conduct issues prior to them getting to the Hearing stage.

-          A separate motion on notice to remove the Leader of the Council may have been a better way to express this view.

-          The response that the recent Hearing Review Panels had attracted was universally negative. The reputation of the Council had been damaged, and there needed to be a positive conversation about moving forward and dealing with this issue.

-          The administration was midway through a second balanced budget and had invested in services.

-          If due process was not followed with Code of Conduct complaints, then it would lead to no checks and balances. The outcome of the Hearing Review Panels’ proceedings should be respected.

-          The Hearings that had taken place were almost a year on from when the complaints had originally been lodged. This did not necessarily reflect present behaviours from Councillors.

An amendment was accepted by the mover of the original motion to replace the wording of the substantive motion with the following:

This Council reaffirms the principles of the LGA “Debate Not Hate” campaign.

It therefore became the substantive motion.

Having been moved and seconded, following a vote the substantive motion was AGREED.