Follow me @LindaDerrick1
Facebook Linda Derrick for Ridgeway East
25 January 2024
This is a report of the Full Council meeting of Hughenden Parish Council on Tuesday 16 January 2024. This is the second installment.
Item 8 on the agenda was a report from the Deputy Monitoring Officer in Bucks Council. It recommended that HPC sanction me due to an anonymous complaint.
So I declared a personal interest at the beginning of the meeting. This is what I said:
“The relevant guidance advises councillors to declare a personal interest if a decision “might reasonably be regarded as affecting their well-being”.
I’m not sure whether Item 8 might affect my well-being as the outcome of the Council’s discussion will make little difference.
However, BC’s complaints procedure caused me considerable stress until I disconnected last year.
I had a stroke around the time of the last Council meeting where I was shouted at and disrespected.
So, I am going to err on the side of caution and declare an interest. When we get to Item 8, I will, if the Chair allows, read a personal explanation under Standing Orders and then leave the meeting for the item.”
No-one commented.
I had also told myself to leave the meeting if anyone started shouting or arguing. So I left the meeting during item 4 (approval of the draft minutes) and sat in the corner of the Council offices. I returned to the meeting after item 5 when Council had elected Cllr Thomas as Vice Chair.
When we got to Item 8, I duly gave the Council the Personal Explanation below and went and sat in my car in the carpark.
Personal Explanation under Standing Order
1. “This is a complaint made by a former employee of HPC, called Ms. X by Bucks Council, about a blog I posted on 1 February 2023. I hope councillors have found this blog and read it. I don’t propose to repeat what is in it.
2. All I will add as background is that, in December 2022, I told Bucks Council that I would no longer participate with their complaints system. I declined to do so on the grounds of its unprofessionalism, bias and lack of integrity. Participation was also adversely affecting my mental health.
3. Since then, I have not even read their e-mails. So the first time I saw this report was when it was sent out with the agenda.
4. I will make four comments:-
a) BC concludes that I have breached the Code of Conduct because I have disclosed personal information about Ms. X (as listed in para 6 of the decision notice).
However, all of this information was in the public domain by the date of my blog; I was not disclosing it.
(i) I am said to have disclosed Ms. X’s resignation. Ms. X’s resignation was formally received by Council and recorded in the Council minutes. It is in the public domain.
(ii) I am said to have disclosed personal information by “referencing” a sum of money. This sum of money was in the public domain having been “referenced” previously by the internal auditor in one of his reports; he was concerned the sum had not been authorised by Council.
The Council has still to respond to that report and all the other internal auditor’s reports.
(iii) Ms. X’s intention to make a complaint/concern had been made public by Ms. X herself.
b) it is very easy to deduce who Ms. X is.
c) there is no suggestion that what I wrote is inaccurate or untrue.
d) at no time have I been asked to take any of my blogs down or amend them by Ms. X.
5. I would suggest that Council carefully considers the consequences of any decisions it might take, particularly the impact on the complainant and the Council. Council has discretion as to accepting the recommendations of BC or not; councillors are required under the Code of Conduct to exercise their independent judgement.
6. Any public statement or publicity given to this complaint will simply mean more people reading my blogs, particularly the one about Ms. X which is referenced in the decision notice. I assume this is not what either Ms. X or the Council want.
7. The Bucks Free Press say they have not received a press release on this complaint which BC said it would issue. Perhaps BC decided that publicity was not in the best interests of Ms. X.
8. Any decision the Council makes would have little impact on me.
9. The sanctions recommended by BC are largely the same as the previous sanctions imposed last April. These are meant to stand until I have attended training to be arranged by the Council. The then locum Clerk said Council would arrange the training “as soon as reasonably practicable”. I have asked repeatedly for this training which includes data protection training. I am still waiting.
10. The Council has failed to deliver for 9 months.
P.S. I think the Sub-Committee has got it wrong when it says “the complainant would be well within their right to pursue a claim with the Information Commissioner for these disclosures”. The complainant has no right to pursue a claim. I am happy to explain why outside this meeting.”
Mr Truppin informed me on Monday that the Council had accepted BC’s recommendations which included a formal sanction.
I’m still waiting for the training.
By the way
A number of people have asked me why I don’t complain about the behaviour of HPC’s councillors. The procedure for complaining about individual councillors is to BC’s Monitoring Officer. I wouldn’t complain to her because, as you see above, I have no confidence in the professionalism, impartiality and integrity of the procedure. It would be a complete waste of my time.
I have, however, complained about the Council’s actions as a corporate body under HPC’s complaints procedure; my complaint of 28 November 2023 is below.
“I understand that under English common law, and indeed under the European Convention of Human Rights, everyone is entitled to natural justice. This consists of two things – a right to a fair hearing and a right for decisions to be taken without bias.
A fair hearing entails a right to be given prior notice of the case, a fair opportunity to answer it, and the opportunity to present their own case.
This is what procedures are for.
In my case, I was not given prior notice of any case against me. All I received was a notice of a summons to an extraordinary meeting of the Council convened by the Chair at which proposals prepared by an ex- councillor, Ms Main, were to be heard. Those proposals were for sanctions to be made against me by the Council.
Cllr Main also proposed a statement to be made by Council which was untrue and defamatory.
I have never been provided with the case or the evidence which would have justified these sanctions or the statement.
I have therefore had no opportunity to answer the case (much less a fair opportunity) and I have been given no opportunity to present my own case.
The Council has failed to comply with its own procedures which require any complaint against a councillor involving a breach of HPC’s Code of Conduct to be referred in confidence to the Monitoring Officer. Instead, the Council considered the proposed sanctions and statement, itself and in public.
The Council has already had legal advice from the Monitoring Officer and the locums Clerks that what was proposed was unlawful.
This is a gross violation of my rights to a fair hearing.
As far as bias is concerned, the Bucks Free Press’s report of the meeting, which I didn’t attend, called it “emotional” and quoted a number of councillors who had clearly come to the meeting having pre-determined what they would decide i.e. they were biased.
Again this is a gross violation of my rights for decisions to be taken without bias.
Council made a number of decisions at that meeting including referring some matters to the Human Resources Committee. It failed to inform me of its decisions.
The Human Resources Committee met on 10 October. I was not informed about this or invited to the meeting, and as the session was held in confidence, again I had no opportunity to know what was discussed and present my own case. Again I was denied natural justice – again a gross violation of my rights.
I wasn’t informed about the outcome of the HR Committee meeting and only found out on receipt of the draft minutes on 17 November. The Committee decided to seek advice from the Monitoring Officer. The Committee meets next in December.
In the meantime, Council decided to place an untrue and defamatory statement on HPC’s website. It has already been there for 2 months.
I would ask Council to take down this statement, and apologise to me for the violation of my rights and damage to my reputation.”
Cllr Jones, the Chair of HPC, responded the same day to say “I agree with Linda, from memory the HR committee shelved the issue. I would be happy to take the item off the website and apologise if necessary.
Cllr Prashar responded to Cllr Jones, also the same day, and disagreed with him.
On 11 December, Mr Truppin said HPC’s complaint procedure was for members of the public – and I was not eligible as I was a councillor.
You can make of this what you will!