Drama at the Council Meeting; “Democracy has been Denied”
It was all high drama at the council meeting on 18th March 2024.
The Independent Group had submitted an emergency motion. The officers of the council, not apparently the politicians, took the view that the demand to publish the report into the behaviour of the mayor and councillors at the Budget Working Commission in December 2022 “was inappropriate and out of order”. The report was presented to the Standards Advisory Committee in January 2024, and there it has remained.
We are told that nobody breached the codes of conduct, so why all the secrecy?
Not unreasonably, the official opposition on Newham Council wanted details. So did the other opposition party, though they focus on the revelations in the peer review.
If information is withheld, it suggests a cover up, even if there isn’t one. The Independents submitted a motion in which publication of the report was a key feature. It was for this reason that the motion was ruled out of order.
We learn that there was an interesting series of events in Labour Group, precipitated by the motion. Many members, it appears, were sympathetic to the motion. However, the motion was submitted by the opposition, and many of those Labour members see themselves as being under threat from the Independent Group at the next election. They did not want to give the Independents a victory at council. Up stepped Cllr Susan Masters, with a Labour motion, similar in many respects to the Independent motion.
Alas for Cllr Masters, the Group were informed that any reference to the Standards report would be ruled out of order. It was a good try, but the political bureaucrats had covered the bases.
When the council meeting commenced, at the point when motions would be discussed, Cllr Mirza challenged the decision to block discussion, stating “we have no faith in the governance and impartiality of this organisation”. He continued to express displeasure at the “undemocratic” nature of the meeting and informed the council that the Independent Group would be boycotting the meeting forthwith. So, they left.
Open Newham have submitted an FOI to have the contents of the report revealed. This was denied. We have requested an internal review of the decision. We are confident that the council will not change its mind. We are preparing our submission to the Information Commissioner, whom we are confident, will take a very different view of the matter.
This comes on top of a series of external reports that point to a dysfunctional political leadership. Rather than deal with the core problem, (think bullying from the top), it appears that the Chief Exec has determined that the SAC report and the peer review were insufficient and has informed councillors that she will be commissioning “a working group to develop the work around Member culture, conduct and behaviour”. The peer review had taken an approach that was understated and non-confrontational. As you read the review, it appears that specific difficulties that seem to relate to a single individual are anonymised and stated in the plural. This has given the Chief Exec the opportunity to broaden the scope of any review and, in effect, get her boss off the hook. The simple expedient of conducting yet another ‘review’ means that decisions on any substantive matter can be put off. Remember, it took over a year for the SAC to receive a report into the events at the December 2022 Budget Working Commission. You don’t need to be a cynic to suggest that the announcement of a working party is merely an attempt to delay, and possibly deflect, any criticism of the mayor.
As will be clear, the Labour Group still leaks like a sieve and we are grateful to all of those members who shared information with us, in part or in whole. The Chief Exec does not like the leaks. However, just what leak is she trying to plug? What is the “decision” she alludes to?
On top of this, there is one line in her email that is positively Orwellian “The leakage of the decision of the Standards Advisory Committee (SAC) will be investigated”. We know that Newham is averse to sharing information, but it seems that even sharing a “decision” is prohibited. So, what is the “decision” that it is prohibited to tell the public about?
We do not expect the Labour members to ask, but perhaps one of the opposition councillors might enquire.
This is the text of the letter from the Head of Electoral Services.
Dear Mayor and Councillors,
As you will be aware, I refer to an Emergency Motion submitted on Friday 15 March by Cllr Mirza, please note that the Chair of Council has on advice from the Chief Executive and the Monitoring Officer decided to reject the motion as currently drafted. The reason given is that as it contains information relating to matters which were considered in a confidential session of Standards Advisory Committee, and therefore it is deemed to be improper and out of order. Please note, the Chief Executive will be sending out a further statement to all Members in relation to this matter.
Thank you.
Akhtar Ali
Head of Elections and Interim Head of Democratic Services I Resources
London Borough of Newham
And here is the email from the Chief Executive.
Dear Councillors
I started in my role as Chief Executive of this Council six months ago. My only focus has been to deliver for the Council and to improve the services that you all want for the residents of Newham. That has been my commitment from day one and continues to be so.
My task has become difficult due to the distraction caused in relation to a matter that resulted in an independent Members Code of Conduct investigation report arising from events at a meeting of the Budget Working Group in December 2022.
This is leading to a number of emails to both myself and the Monitoring Officer. It is not appropriate to compromise the role of statutory officers in any way in the midst of political tensions. Neither is it appropriate to immerse us in unfounded conspiracy theories.
The leakage of the decision of the Standards Advisory Committee (SAC) will be investigated, as requested by SAC members who are concerned that this has occurred and resulted in the role of the SAC being undermined through the released motion last week.
I can clearly see that without the matters around this decision being resolved, the Member culture of this organisation will not improve. We have had independent preliminary legal advice and advice from the Monitoring Officer in relation to the report. The Council considered carefully whether the report should be published. However some Members have chosen not to accept this advice or to accept the decision and role of the SAC in its determination.
I have consulted the Monitoring Officer and in an effort to bring this to a resolution, I have asked for independent legal advice from a leading Counsel to ascertain the below:-
· With the passage of time, regardless of the way in which SAC dealt with this in January 2024, who should now have access to the report in light of there being no finding of a breach of the code of conduct against any Member as determined by the independent author.
Once this advice is provided, for which I am expecting a quick turnaround, I hope that all individuals will respect the outcome of the advice.
I would like to clarify two other areas that were noted in the released emergency motion.
· The Unions have been involved in the LGA Peer Review from the outset. They are also part of the work around culture and I meet with them regularly on a cycle agreed with them. We in fact have a meeting today, the action plan and culture work is tabled.
· I welcome a working group to develop the work around Member culture, conduct and behaviour. I have been asking for us all to do this together from the beginning and it is an important step in our LGA peer work. I had already asked the LGA for options around this and will ask them to expedite these options so that this can happen sooner than the publication of the final action plan.
Best wishes,
Abi Gbago
Chief Executive
London Borough of Newham