By Golly! formal decision

(2) Councillor Barnett did NOT fail to comply with paragraph 3(2)(a) of the Council’s Code of Conduct for Members (‘You must not do anything which may cause your authority to breach any of its equality duties (in particular as set out in the Equality Act 2010’); and (3) Councillor Barnett DID fail to comply with paragraph 5 of the Council’s Code of Conduct for Members (‘You must not conduct yourself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing your office or authority into disrepute’).

REASONS FOR THE DECISION With regard to the decision over whether Councillor Barnett brought her office into disrepute, this was difficult and the Panel spent a great deal of time considering the point in fine detail. We find that on balance, there was a very fine line, which resulted in a breach of paragraph 5 of the Code of Conduct. We accept that this was inadvertent and that it was not intended to cause offence. We are also mindful of the work that Councillor Barnett has done and continues to do in her community, including with residents from a BME background, such as the Bangladeshi Women’s Community. We have also taken into account the fact that Councillor Barnett has agreed to apologise and to undertake equalities training, and offered to meet with members of the BME Workers Forum. We support those proposals and would recommend them to Councillor Barnett with the help of the Authority. Finally, the case has highlighted the need for training and awareness raising among all councillors on equalities issues. We therefore recommend that equalities training be a mandatory part of Member Development training.

Readers who submit articles must agree to our terms of use. The content is the sole responsibility of the contributor and is unmoderated. But we will react if anything that breaks the rules comes to our attention. If you wish to complain about this article, contact us here