PSOW Individual Decisions

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a Member of Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”) had failed to observe the Code of Conduct for Members of the Council. It was alleged that the Member had published a post in June 2020 on the social media platform Facebook, which could be considered to be racist, and could have the potential to damage the reputation of the office of Member and of the Council. The Ombudsman’s investigation established that the Member had publicly published his post in order to raise concerns about the Council’s decision to light up County Hall in support of Black Lives Matter. The Member deleted his entire Facebook profile page some weeks later. Numerous complaints about the post were made to the Council and to the Ombudsman’s office, and the Member was subject to local and national Press interest, as well as considerable comment on Facebook. The Member said that he considered the post to fall within his right to free speech because he did not believe he had really offended anybody, and the complaints that were made against him were politically motivated. The Ombudsman accepted that the Member had the right to question the Council’s decision to support Black Lives Matter, however the language used by the Member was offensive and went beyond what would be expected of a councillor in a political discussion. The Member had not taken advantage of opportunities to attend equality and diversity training or social media training. The Ombudsman determined that the Member may have breached the Council’s Code of Conduct, in particular paragraph 6(1)(a) as he could reasonably be regarded as having behaved in a manner which might bring the office of member, or the Council itself, into disrepute. The Ombudsman referred his investigation report to the Monitoring Officer of Pembrokeshire County Council for consideration by its Standards Committee. The Standards Committee decided that the Member had made the post in his capacity as Councillor and censur

It was alleged that a Councillor (“the Member”) posted videos on the social media platform, TikTok, which brought their office as a councillor and Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”) into disrepute. The Ombudsman commenced an investigation into whether the Member may have breached paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Code of Conduct, that members must not conduct themselves in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing their office or authority into disrepute. The investigation found that the Member posted a series of videos, some of which included TikTok sounds which contained expletives. The Member, who had been appointed to a school governing body, was suspended from the governing body while the matter was investigated by the Council. A number of witnesses were interviewed. Some considered the videos to be distasteful. The Council’s investigation found that the videos did not impact on the Member’s role as a governor. The investigation found the Member was acting in his private capacity when he posted the videos. Relevant caselaw has established that for a breach of the “disrepute” provision to be found, a member’s conduct must impact upon their Council’s reputation and/or the role of elected member and go beyond affecting their personal reputation. While the nature of the videos may be considered distasteful by some, TikTok sounds are widely and easily available on TikTok and are often widely reproduced by TikTok users in large quantities. TikTok is a social media platform in which users are required to be 13 years old and content of the type posted by the Member is widely and freely available without censorship. The videos were clearly intended to be humorous and to make people laugh. The videos were not directed at anyone and do not display any intent to cause harm or upset. The Ombudsman found that there was no evidence of any failure to comply with the Code of Conduct of the relevant authority concerned.

The Ombudsman investigated 3 complaints made to him by 3 members of the public about a Member (“the Member”) of Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”). It was alleged by the first complainant that the Member had suggested on social media that a fellow Member of the Council had an interest in children and had shared images of a child.  It was also alleged that the Member had wrongly alleged that the first complainant had served time in prison. It was alleged by the second complainant that the Member had posted misleading information about the Welsh Government’s Relationships and Sexuality Education (“RSE”) curriculum on social media. It was alleged by the third complainant that the Member had suggested on a public Facebook post that the third complainant was on the sex offender’s register. The Ombudsman found that the Member had wrongly stated that a fellow Member of the Council had shared an explicit pornographic video of a girl under the age of 17 when that Member was 18.  The Ombudsman also found that the Member had wrongly alleged on social media and in emails to his office that the first complainant had served time in prison. The Ombudsman considered that the content of social media posts made by the Member in respect of the RSE curriculum were not factual and were misleading. The Ombudsman also found that the Member had falsely suggested on a public Facebook post that the third complainant was on the sex offender’s register. The Ombudsman also determined that the Member had attempted to mislead him during the investigation. The Ombudsman concluded that the Member’s conduct may amount to a breach of paragraphs 4(c) and 6(1)(a) of the Council’s Code of Conduct and referred his report to the President of the Adjudication Panel for Wales for adjudication by a tribunal. The Adjudication Panel for Wales found that the Member had breached paragraphs 4(c) and 6(1)(a) and disqualified him for 3 years.

The Ombudsman investigated 3 complaints made to him by 3 members of the public about a Member (“the Member”) of Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”). It was alleged by the first complainant that the Member had suggested on social media that a fellow Member of the Council had an interest in children and had shared images of a child.  It was also alleged that the Member had wrongly alleged that the first complainant had served time in prison. It was alleged by the second complainant that the Member had posted misleading information about the Welsh Government’s Relationships and Sexuality Education (“RSE”) curriculum on social media. It was alleged by the third complainant that the Member had suggested on a public Facebook post that the third complainant was on the sex offender’s register. The Ombudsman found that the Member had wrongly stated that a fellow Member of the Council had shared an explicit pornographic video of a girl under the age of 17 when that Member was 18.  The Ombudsman also found that the Member had wrongly alleged on social media and in emails to his office that the first complainant had served time in prison. The Ombudsman considered that the content of social media posts made by the Member in respect of the RSE curriculum were not factual and were misleading. The Ombudsman also found that the Member had falsely suggested on a public Facebook post that the third complainant was on the sex offender’s register. The Ombudsman also determined that the Member had attempted to mislead him during the investigation. The Ombudsman concluded that the Member’s conduct may amount to a breach of paragraphs 4(c) and 6(1)(a) of the Council’s Code of Conduct and referred his report to the President of the Adjudication Panel for Wales for adjudication by a tribunal. The Adjudication Panel for Wales found that the Member had breached paragraphs 4(c) and 6(1)(a) and disqualified him for 3 years.

The Ombudsman investigated 3 complaints made to him by 3 members of the public about a Member (“the Member”) of Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”). It was alleged by the first complainant that the Member had suggested on social media that a fellow Member of the Council had an interest in children and had shared images of a child.  It was also alleged that the Member had wrongly alleged that the first complainant had served time in prison. It was alleged by the second complainant that the Member had posted misleading information about the Welsh Government’s Relationships and Sexuality Education (“RSE”) curriculum on social media. It was alleged by the third complainant that the Member had suggested on a public Facebook post that the third complainant was on the sex offender’s register. The Ombudsman found that the Member had wrongly stated that a fellow Member of the Council had shared an explicit pornographic video of a girl under the age of 17 when that Member was 18.  The Ombudsman also found that the Member had wrongly alleged on social media and in emails to his office that the first complainant had served time in prison. The Ombudsman considered that the content of social media posts made by the Member in respect of the RSE curriculum were not factual and were misleading. The Ombudsman also found that the Member had falsely suggested on a public Facebook post that the third complainant was on the sex offender’s register. The Ombudsman also determined that the Member had attempted to mislead him during the investigation. The Ombudsman concluded that the Member’s conduct may amount to a breach of paragraphs 4(c) and 6(1)(a) of the Council’s Code of Conduct and referred his report to the President of the Adjudication Panel for Wales for adjudication by a tribunal. The Adjudication Panel for Wales found that the Member had breached paragraphs 4(c) and 6(1)(a) and disqualified him for 3 years.

Mrs A complained about the actions of Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”) following the sexual assault of her daughter, B. Mrs A complained that the Council failed to safeguard B in line with its statutory duty, failed to consider whether to review/monitor the School’s response to safeguard B and failed to consider whether to review/monitor the School’s handling of Mrs A’s complaint of February 2019. Mrs A also complained that the Council failed to follow its complaints process in an appropriate and timely manner. The investigation found that the Council failed to communicate and share information appropriately with Mrs A and B in relation to its statutory duties and failed to provide Mrs A with a copy of the outcome of enquiries in a timely manner. It also found that the Council failed to consider whether to review/monitor the School’s handling of Mrs A’s complaint of February 2019 and was unable to provide copies of review documentation, which amounted to maladministration. The failings identified caused Mrs A and B significant stress, distress and inconvenience, which was an injustice to them. The investigation found that there were missed opportunities to signpost Mrs A to the Complaints Officer and she was never formally advised, or provided any written documentation about, how to make a complaint. This failing caused Mrs A an injustice as she was unable to escalate her complaint in a timely manner. Her complaints were not promptly investigated, and this caused significant stress and inconvenience to Mrs A as she continued to pursue her complaints over subsequent months/years. The Ombudsman upheld these parts of the complaint. The investigation found, however, that there was nothing more that Social Services could have done to assist the School in safeguarding B once its duty had ended and the responsibility had been passed to the School to monitor the situation. Therefore, the Ombudsman did not uphold this aspect of Mrs A’s complaint. The Council agre

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a Member (“the Member”) of Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”) had failed to observe the Code of Conduct for Members. It was alleged that the Member had made threatening comments about a member of the public, which could have brought the Council into disrepute. The Ombudsman decided to discontinue the investigation because the investigation established that the comments were made wholly in the Member’s personal capacity and the tone and comments exchanged with the member of the public who made the complaint were of a similar tone and content to those the Member had made. In view of this, the Ombudsman concluded that it was no longer in the public interest for him to continue the investigation.

The Ombudsman undertook an investigation against a Member (“the Member”) of Pembrokeshire County Council (“the Council”) to consider whether the Member misled him during the course of an ongoing investigation. The Ombudsman considered whether the Member may have breached paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Code of Conduct (“the Code”). The Member had been interviewed as a witness in an ongoing investigation.  Following his initial interview, information was sought from third parties which indicated that the information provided by the Member at interview was incorrect.  The Member was subsequently interviewed on a second occasion and as there appeared to be discrepancies in the information provided by the Member, the Ombudsman began an investigation. The Member provided a full statement to the Ombudsman in response to the allegation.  The Ombudsman accepted the explanations provided by the Member regarding the discrepancies in his 2 interviews.  Although the Ombudsman considered that the Member could have been more clear in his interviews, he did not consider that there was a deliberate attempt on the Member’s part to provide misleading information during the investigation.  Therefore, the Ombudsman found no evidence of a breach of paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Code of Conduct.

Mr X complained that he had submitted complaints to the Council on two occasions and had not received an acknowledgement or formal response. In settlement of the complaint the Council agreed to undertake the following:- By 7 June 2021 Provide Mr X with an apology for the delay in responding to the original email and an explanation as to how the error happened and what has been done to prevent a recurrence Provide a response to the original complaint

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a Former Member of Pembroke Dock Town Council (“the Council”) had failed to observe the Code of Conduct for Members of the Council.  It was alleged that the Former Member had published a post on the social media platform Facebook, which could be considered racist and could have the potential to damage the reputation of the Council. The Ombudsman’s investigation established that the Former Member had “liked” and “shared” the Facebook post, and that there had been a short delay before he took the post down.  The investigation found that the Former Member had misled a local newspaper by stating that his Facebook account had been “hacked”, but had corrected this within 48 hours.  It also found that the Former Member resigned as a member of the Council and was interviewed by police, who took no further action. The Former Member said that he had not recognised the racist overtones when he shared the post, and was not a racist person.  He apologised for any offense he might have caused.  The Former Member accepted that he had the opportunity to attend Code of Conduct training which would have included training on equality issues.  He had not attended, due partly to his disability, but accepted that he had not requested training in a manner more accessible to him. The Ombudsman determined that the Former Member may have breached the Council’s Code of Conduct, in particular, paragraphs 4(a) and 4(b), as he may have failed to have due regard to the principle of equality of opportunity for all people while carrying out his duties, and may not have shown due respect and consideration for others.  The Ombudsman also found that the Former Member’s actions could reasonably be regarded as behaviour which might bring the office of member, or the Council itself into disrepute, which may amount to a potential breach of paragraph 6(1)(a) of the Code of Conduct. The Standards Committee of Pembrokeshire County Council determined that the Former Mem