The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council has refused to investigate his standards complaint about the conduct of councillors at a town council who arranged an extraordinary meeting of the full council. There is insufficient injustice and it is not a good use of limited public resources to investigate.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council’s monitoring officer rejected his complaint about the conduct of town councillors. He says the monitoring officer advised him to take up his complaint with the chair of the town council and clerk who are the people he complains about. Mr X says the town council failed to follow standing orders in calling an extraordinary meeting of the full council which overturned an earlier decision to apply for clean bathing water status on a stretch of river. Mr X wants the Council’s monitoring officer to investigate. He says he worked on the proposal for four years.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as parish and town councils. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34A, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered Mr X’s information and comments. I have considered the Council’s reply to the conduct complaint. I have considered information on the internet including the record of the town council’s meeting to which Mr X objects and information on the clean bathing water application proposal.
My assessment
I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons: The Ombudsman investigates fault causing injustice. There is insufficient personal injustice to Mr X who acts in this case in an official position. The town council decided to support the application, for clean bathing water status, which South Oxfordshire District Council is pursuing with the Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).
It would not be a good use of limited public resources to investigate. The Council decided Mr X’s complaint was against the town council, rather than about ethical standards, because he alleged it was acting beyond its legal powers (breach of standing orders) in arranging the meeting and listed seven or more councillors.
We cannot lawfully investigate the actions of the town council (see paragraphs 3 and 4). We therefore cannot investigate the town council’s actions regarding the ‘clean bathing water’ application.
Final decision
The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council has refused to investigate his standards complaint about the conduct of councillors at a town council who arranged an extraordinary meeting of the full council. There is insufficient injustice and it is not a good use of limited public resources to investigate.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman