On 14th March 201, the Argyll Rural Schools Network lodged a formal complaint with Argyll and Bute Council, alleging that, in repeatedly claiming the second attempt at school closures as ‘hers’, the Education Spokesperson, Councillor Ellen Morton, was in breach of the Councillor’s Code of Conduct.
The charge rests upon her arguable usurping of the formal responsibilities of council officers.
In an exchange of emails on the matter between ARSN and the Executive Director of Customer Services, Douglas Hendry first accounted for delays in responding to the complaint.
After acknowledging the receipt of the complaint on 16th March, Mr Hendry next wrote to ARSN on 4th April and only after their enquiry on its progress.
At that stage, Mr Hendry simply said that he had ‘commenced an investigation into the matters’ raised by ARSN, that he could, while this was ongoing, not comment and would make contact when he was in a position to do so.
The efficient ARSN responded to this on 5th April, asking for confirmation that, as governed by the Council’s published complaint procedures, the findings of Mr Hendry’s investigation would be issued by close of play on Friday 8th April – within 20 working days of the lodging of the complaint?
Three days later, on 8th April, Mr Hendry replied to say that the complaint was being dealt with as a Monitoring Officer Investigation, which is not subject to the same timeframes as matters dealt with under the usual Complaints Procedure. In this note he confirmed that he expected ‘to be in a position to respond no later than Friday 15th April.
On Friday Mr Hendry made contact with ARSN to say that he had concluded his investigation but – a strange difficulty – couldn’t get hold of an electronic version of its conclusions so that he could sign it off before sending it to ARSN. He has promised it for the beginning of he week.
The background to the complaint
The first set of proposals were fronted by the recently arrived Cleland Sneddon, Executive Director for Community Services and responsible for education,
As the Scottish Rural Schools Network’s (SRSN’s) analytic report, commissioned by opposition councillors, demonstrated, these were legally non compliant and evidentially insupportable. On 5th January 2011, at the meeting where the SRSN report was formally presented, they were withdrawn from the public consultation they should never have been allowed to reach.
That debacle resulted in the new Depute Leader of the Council, Councillor Morton, also Education Spokesperson, taking firm control of a shambolic situation and putting herself on the line as the one who would sort it out.
While this stance was a marriage of hubris, braggadocio and political necessity, it is indisputably the case that the Education Spokesperson continually presented the process of evolution of the new list of schools proposed for closure – and the list itself – as ‘hers’.
That persistent claim and the procedure that may or may not have lain behind it, was the focus for the formal complaint of breach of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct lodged against her by ARSN.
The result of Mr Hendry’s monitorial investigation should be known soon (before or after the council meeting on Tuesday?). Prepare to be unsurprised by its conclusions.
The heart of the matter
The Depute Leader of the Council, would have to have had the approval of the Council Leader at least and probably of her colleagues on the Executive, to announce herself persistently as the author of the second attempt at this fiscally driven initiative to close rural primary scchools.
She would only have felt the need to do so and would only have been given licence to do so in a situation where the council executive felt that they could not trust Mr Sneddon to lead on it again.
It may be that the shot across the bows of the formal complaint from ARSN on the grounds of the governing Code of Conduct will have led to a rebalancing of the appearance of the leadership of the process.
The key question is, where the council has learned from a damagingly public failure that one of its most senior officers has been unable to perform to the expected standard, it has neither requested his resignation nor insisted upon his sacking.
In the spirit of co-operation may I suggest that Douglas Hendry looks down the back of Sneddon’s sofa for his conclusions. Whilst he is there he might also come across Minard’s HMIE report.
In all seriousness though it is my opinion that these ongoing delays have been deliberately managed to ensure the response comes out after Tuesday’s vote. There is no reason on why this investigation should take as long as it has unless Douglas Hendry is struggling to find a way of saying ‘You have a point but…’ in such way as for it not to sound like a cover up.
If I recall from quotes in the press Cllr Morton is convinced of her innocence and is confident Hendry will reject the claim. I have also been informed that Alan Reid has totally rejected any idea that she is in breach of the Code. It would appear Douglas Hendry is taking a bit longer to come to that conclusion.
Bear in mind that his reputation is on the line as well. If he rejects the claim then the Standards Commission are likely to be brought into play and, in his role as Monitoring Officer, he will have to provide them with information on his investigation and conclusions. It would make for unpleasant reading if the Standards Commission found Douglas Hendry’s conclusion to be in error as it would beg questions of his competence AND what influences were put upon him to come to that conclusion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Could Mr Hendry be trying to back this each way? Realising his professional reputation is in the balance?
Timing can now be added to the list of suspicious activities from Castle Greyskull.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Integrity. I don’t know why this complaint was not taken direct to the Stardards Commission and their Investigating Officer. Taking it to Dougie Hendry only delays the process. Anyone who is not directly linked to the ConDemAll administration has no doubt that the Code of Conduct has been broken by Cllr Morton.
Even in the unlikely event that Dougie Hendry agreed, then there is no action he can take. The Code of Conduct lists the actions that can be taken if a councillor breaks the Code and it is only Standads Commission that can take such action against a councillor. Someone needs to get their act together and lodge a complaint with the Standards Commission now. Any member of the public (or lots of them) can do that now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Primary
The Standards Commission make it clear that they prefer complaints to be taken to the Council first rather than they being the first port of complaint. I would go as far as suggesting that they look less kindly on compaints that come straight to them.
Unlike A&B Council, ARSN, have followed proper procedure.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0