Full written decision - Cllr M Brain

Purpose of the meeting

(1) To hold a hearing to consider the Investigating Officer's Report and findings that the Code of Conduct has been broken by the Subject Member.

(2) The Sub-Committee must:

• consider the complaint and test the evidence contained in the investigating officer's report
• consider any oral representations from the subject member and investigating officer
• establish the facts of the matter
• make a decision on whether the subject member has broken the ode and if so,
• decide whether any sanctions should be applied

Materials considered by the sub-committee

• the Investigating Officer's report
• the summary report of the Monitoring Officer, which included the IP's views
• the relevant councillors' Code of Conduct
• the council's arrangements for dealing with allegations of breaches of the Code of Conduct for Members and Co-opted Members (known as "the Arrangements")

Procedure to be followed

The Standards Sub-Committee followed the procedure as contained in the Arrangements at Annex 2:

• appointment of Chair
• declarations of interest
• if the Member is not present - consideration as to whether to adjourn or to proceed in the absence of the Member (not required)
• introductions
• exclusion of the press and public
• summary report of the Monitoring Officer
• examination of Investigation report and written representations 
  a)    Investigating Officer
  The Sub-Committee will consider their report. 
  b)    Subject Member
  No written submission was received from the Subject Member by the required date of 6 February 2026.
• oral evidence
  a)    Investigating Officer
  b)    Subject Member
• deliberations
  a)    The members of the sub-committee will consider their findings and determine sanction(s), if appropriate, in private
  b)    The Legal Advisor and Clerk will remain with the sub-committee members
• decision
  a)    The Subject Member, Investigating Officer and Monitoring Officer will be asked to return for the announcement of the decision
• recommendations
• close of meeting

Summary of complaint

The complaints related to the subject member's time as Trustee of Blaydon Youth Club (BYC) and actions following his departure from this role.

There were ten complaints made against the subject member. After initial consideration, prior to the commencement of the investigation, one complaint was considered to be outside of the scope of the Code of Conduct.

The complaints to be investigated involved:

• breaching confidentiality and unfounded allegations of wrongdoing
• acting against the interests of the trustees and BYC
• conflict of interest
• disrespectful attitude towards consultants
• failure to discharge duty of care, probity and accountability
• failure to follow normal safer recruitment practice
• failure to carry out responsibility regarding charity commission compliance
• bringing council and Labour colleagues into disrepute
• disclosure of confidential information

The complaints were therefore referred to the Investigating Officer for formal investigation. 

Summary of investigating officer's findings

The investigating officer found that the subject member had failed to comply with the Councillors' Code of Conduct in respect of one complaint (disclosure of confidential information), which amounted to two paragraphs of the Code being breached.

The investigating officer found "no breach" in respect of the remaining eight complaints.

Summary of investigating officer's additional representations

The investigating officer acknowledged that the outcome of her report had been finely balanced and many of the "no breach" findings could have had a different outcome. The subject member's conduct had been inappropriate and would not be regarded as best practice when acting in the role as Trustee.

The investigating officer stated that during the investigation, evidence had been confusing but the subject member had repeatedly expressed the view that he was doing "the right thing".

The investigating officer explained that when she returned to the wording of the Code of Conduct, she was confident that she had reached the correct outcome for each complaint.

Summary of subject member's representations

The subject member was given the opportunity to provide written representations prior to the hearing but failed to do so within the timescale required. The subject member denied having been given a deadline for submission and asked to submit documents, which in his view, would assist the sub-committee. This was refused by the Chair.

The subject member denied acting in any way which breached the Councillor's Code of Conduct.  When asked questions by the sub-committee he justified all of his actions and denied any wrongdoing.  The subject member gave context to allegations regarding his behaviour and asked that this was taken into account.

The subject member accepted that he had disclosed a document following his tenure as Trustee at BYC, however he persistently denied that it contained personal data or that it was confidential in nature. He justified the disclosure of the document by stating he had a legal obligation to do so.

The Subject Member repeatedly stated the investigation report failed to evidence any wrongdoing and he asked the sub-committee to dismiss the allegations.

Views of the Independent Person (IP)

The IP was consulted throughout the investigation process.

The IP agreed with the findings of the investigating officer and recommended that the matter was brought to a conclusion at this hearing.

The IP supported a recommendation for training as an appropriate sanction. 

The sub-committee's decision

The Standards Sub-Committee had regard to the findings of the investigating officer however came to a different determination based on the evidence in the investigation report. 

The sub-committee concluded that the subject member had failed to comply with the Councillors' Code of Conduct in six of the nine complaints, amounting to a breach of four paragraphs of the Code (one paragraph [No.4] was found to have been breached multiple times).

Summary of findings

Sanctions

Where the decision is that the Code has been broken then the sub-committee must consider if sanctions are appropriate and if so which ones. 

The following options are available to the sub-committee:

a) To take no further action

b) Issue a formal censure

c) Refer the determination findings to the council for information

d) Make publication of the determination findings by such means as thought fit

e) Request the council to remove the member from being the chair or vice chair of any committee or sub-committee

f) Request the council to remove them from any or all committees or sub-committees for a specified period

g) Request the council to remove the member for a specified time from all or specified outside appointments to which s/he has been appointed or nominated the council

h) Offer training to the member; or

i) Exclude the member from the council's offices or other premises or facilities, for a specified period and to the extent desirable and so as not to interfere with the democratic process, in particular the member's ability to carry out his or her role as an elected member

Decision on sanctions

The decision of the Standards Sub-Committee was that the subject member should be offered training by the monitoring officer, tailored to the findings of the sub-committee.

Next steps

• The Monitoring Officer will make a short written decision available on the day of the hearing
• Within two weeks of the end of the hearing, the Monitoring Officer will circulate a full written decision, to the Member and the Complainant and convene an Audit and Standards Committee to receive the recommendation report (taking place on 3 March 2026)