This morning, I toddled along to county hall to observe the
standards committee hearing into the Ombudsman's finding that
Cllr Wyn Evans (IPG) had breached the code of conduct by failing
to declare an interest in a planning application by one of his
"friends" for holiday chalets at Heron's Brook near
Narberth.
The reason for the inverted commas around friends will be explained
later.
What immediately struck Old Grumpy was Cllr Evans' statement
to the Ombudsman that he had not received any training in the
code of conduct.
This was backed up by the council's monitoring officer at the
time of the alleged breach who "confirmed that Cllr Evans
had not received any training in the code of conduct since becoming
a member of the council."
As this didn't accord with Old Grumpy's recollection of events
- soon after the 2004 election I clearly remember sitting next
to to Cllr Evans during an all-day training session presented
by a barrister specialising in planning law at which the code
of conduct was specifically covered - I made a mental note to
do some research.
Fortunately, this wasn't required because someone has gone to
the trouble of seeking out the relevant documents and placing
them in an appendix at the back of the Ombudsman's report.
These include the itineraries for three training sessions held
just after the 2004 elections together with a list of those who
attended.
And lo and behold Cllr Evans has signed in at two of them.
During the hearing, standards committee member Mrs Sheila LaCroix
pointed out that, like all members, Cllr Evans had signed an
undertaking on taking up office to abide by the Code.
"Did you sign it and not read it?" she asked.
"Certainly not! I read everything", he replied, adding
for good measure: "I thought the training was excellent."
And when another member, Mr John Edge put it to Cllr Evans that
he had told the Ombudsman that he had received no training in
the code, he replied: "That is totally incorrect - I did
receive training."
Now, just in case you think the Ombudsman imagined this bit about
lack of training, I have scanned in part of the questionnaire
completed by Cllr Evans during the Ombudsman's investigation.
The truth is that when it became clear that the defence of lack
of training didn't have any legs, an entirely different story
had to be concocted.
George Orwell would have understood.
Unfortunately, the committee didn't think fit to press the point.
"Willing to wound, and yet afraid to strike,
Just hint a fault, and hesitate dislike"
as Alexander Pope expressed it so beautifully.
Which brings us to "friends".
According to a report in the Western Telegraph, Cllr Evans told
the planning committee: "I can't tell you how I feel about
this application. I know this family so well. It is essential
that you pass this today".
And, although the officers were recommending refusal as the application
was contrary to policy, members voted 17-2 in favour.
Because this was a departure from policy, the planning committee
decision had to go before full council for ratification.
At that meeting, Cllr Michael Williams suggested that, in the
light of his remarks at planning committee, Cllr Evans should
declare an interest in the application (Compound
interest).
It was at this same meeting that the motion of no confidence
in Cllr Brian Hall was to be debated and Grumpette, armed with
her reporter's notepad, was in the public gallery.
According to her notes; submitted to the Ombudsman as evidence,
Cllr Evans responded: "Herons Brook are friends of mine,
that's what comes from living in a small community . . . delighted
to call them friends of mine."
Nowhere in the Ombudsman's report can I find any indication that
Cllr Evans had denied using the words quoted, or something very
similar.
Cllr Evans argued, both during the Ombudman's investigation and
the standards committee hearing, that the applicants were not
really his friends; merely acquaintances, as were most people
in Narberth.
Had he not described them as friends during two council meetings,
that might have had some force.
But, once he had publicly stated that they were his friends,
the game was effectively up.
As the Ombudsman says at para 35 of his report: "The provisions
of the code of conduct relating to the declaration of interests
are designed to secure public confidence in the decisions taken
by council by avoiding not just the reality of bias, but also
the appearance of potential bias (my emphasis) on the
part of members taking those decisions."
Now, a member of the public, on reading in the local paper that
a councillor, advocating that a particular development be given
approval, has stated that he is pleased to call the applicants
his friends, is surely entitled to mutter to himself "It's
not what you know, but who you know" and come to the conclusion
that those with friends in high places are given favourable treatment.
Exactly the reaction the code of conduct is designed to avoid.
This hypothetical member of the public can't be expected to go
to Narberth, or wherever, and make enquiries as to the depth
of this declared friendship.
In the event the standards committee upheld the Ombudsman's finding
that Cllr Evans had a personal interest in the application and
by failing to declare it he had breached the code of conduct.
The committee ordered that he be formally censured and "be
required to follow the code on future occasions".
And I thought we were all required to follow the code on all
occasions.
And in response to the Ombudsman's conclusion: "I have noted
that Cllr Evans has not received any training in the code of
conduct since becoming a member of the council which is a cause
for concern." the committee has recommended that the authority
organise a "top-up training session" for members which
Cllr Evans will be required to attend.
As the Ombudsman's concerns about lack of training were clearly
based on false or misleading information this seems superfluous.
There have already been any number of training sessions following
both the 2004 and 2008 elections and if some members still haven't
grasped the basic principle that you are not on the council to
promote the interests of yourself, your family, or your friends,
then it is difficult to see how more training will get the message
across.