Issue - meetings

 In accordance with the Procedure for Local Standards Hearings paragraph 10.8(b).

Hearing of the Isle of Anglesey County Council’s Standards Committee into allegations relating to the conduct of Councillor Ieuan Williams of the Isle of Anglesey County Council

Public Services Ombudsman for Wales Case Reference 202302251.

Decision of the Isle of Anglesey County Council’s Standards Committee with written reasons

1. Introduction

1.1 A Hearing of the Isle of Anglesey County Council’s Standards Committee (“the Standards Committee”) was held on 16/05/2025 to consider allegations that Councillor Ieuan Williams of the Isle of Anglesey County Council had breached the Code of Conduct for members and to give Councillor Williams (“the Member”) the opportunity to make representations in respect of those allegations.

1.2 Councillor Williams referred himself to the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales (the “PSOW”) after commenting in a meeting “bod angen saethu pob Tory” (“that all Tories should be shot”) at a Current Developments Programme Board meeting on 12/06/2023.

1.3 The PSOW had arranged for the allegations to be investigated, pursuant to her powers under section 69 of the Local Government Act 2000, and produced a Report on the investigation. The PSOW concluded that evidence was found suggesting breaches of paragraphs 4(b) and 6(1)(a) of the Code of Conduct for Members of the Isle of Anglesey County Council.  The PSOW referred her Report to the Monitoring Officer of the Isle of Anglesey County Council (“the Council”) with a direction that the matter be referred to the Standards Committee.

1.4 A Standards Committee meeting was held on 26/02/2025 for an initial determination of the complaint referred by the PSOW to the Committee. In accordance with the Council’s Procedure for Local Standards Hearings (the “Procedure”) the Standards Committee resolved, at the initial determination stage that:

• The matter be referred to a local hearing of the Committee to enable the relevant Member to make representations, orally or in writing, in respect of the findings of the investigation and any allegation that the Member has failed, or may have failed, to comply with the Code of Conduct.

• The Monitoring Officer conducts the Pre-Hearing process in accordance with the Procedure.

1.5 The Standards Committee Hearing was arranged for the 16/05/2025. The Hearing was held in accordance with the Procedure. This Hearing was required to determine, on the balance of probabilities, whether the Member had or had not failed to comply with the relevant paragraphs of the Code of Conduct. In the event of a finding of a breach of the Code of Conduct, the Hearing was required to determine any sanction and / or recommendation to the Council.

1.6 Councillor Williams attended the Hearing on 16/05/2025. Councillor Williams was not legally represented.

1.7 Ms Llinos Lake and Ms Annie Ginwalla from the PSOW’s Office attended the Hearing on 16/05/2025 and made representations on behalf of the PSOW.

1.8 No witnesses were asked to attend the Hearing.

1.9 The Hearing was held in public save for the exclusion of the press and public owing to the disclosure of personal and sensitive information in Councillor Williams’ personal  ...  view the full decision text for item 9

The Chair reported that the Standards Committee had reached a decision on each of the points they were required to determine.  He confirmed that in its deliberations, the Standards Committee had given due regard to the Adjudication Panel for Wales’s Sanctions Guidance, and ensured that its decision making had considered the underlying principes of:

•  Fairness

•  Public interest

•  Proportionality

•  Consistency

•  Equality and impartiality; and

•  Human Rights

The Standards Committee was also mindful of the purposes of sanctions when reaching its decision in this matter.  As summarised in the Adjudication Panel for Wales’s Sanctions Guidance, the purpose of the sanction imposed should:

•  provide a disciplinary response to the Member’s breach of the Code;

•  place the misconduct and appropriate sanction on public record;

•  deter future misconduct on the part of the individual and others;

•  promote a culture of compliance across the relevant authorities;

•  foster public confidence in local democracy.

Furthermore, the Standards Committee had considered the following when determining its position on sanction: -

•  Assessed the seriousness of the breach and any consequences for individuals and/or the Council;

•  Identified the broad type of sanction that the Committee considered most likely to be appropriate having regard to the breach;

•  Considered any relevant mitigating or aggravating circumstances and how these might affect the level of sanction under consideration;

•  Considered any further adjustment necessary to ensure the sanction

achieved an appropriate effect in terms of fulfilling the purposes of the sanctions.

It was noted that it was also in the public interest to consider sanctions imposed by other Standards Committees for similar breaches.  The Standards Committee confirmed that it had reflected on previous reported matters available through the PSOW’s website when reaching its decision on sanctions.

Considering the specifics of this case as set out in the Investigating Officer’s Report, in the context of the principles described above, the Standards Committee’s decision was as follows: -