Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

To introduce each of the members of the Standards Committee, the Member (Councillor Ieuan Williams), the Investigating Officer and any other Officers present and to summarise the procedure of the hearing in accordance with the Procedure for Local Standards Hearings.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

The Chair reported that the Standards Committee meeting will be conducted in accordance with the Council’s Procedure for Local Standards Hearings.  All participants have been provided with a copy of this Procedure, alongside the Agenda, Pre-Hearing Summary Report and Investigating Officer’s Report in advance of the meeting.  These documents have also been published and made available to the press and public.

The Chair introduced each member of the Standards Committee: -

a.  Mr Trefor Owen (Chair) – Independent Member

b.  Mr Brace Griffiths (Vice-Chair) – Independent Member

c.  Mr T Rhys Davies – Independent Member

d.  Mr John R Jones – Independent Member

e.  Mrs Gill Murgatroyd – Independent Member

f.   Councillor Margaret Murley Roberts – Elected Member of the County Council

g.  Councillor Dafydd Rhys Thomas – Elected Member of the County Council

In accordance with Article 9 of the Council’s Constitution, the community council

members of the Standards Committee shall only participate in hearings before the

Standards Committee when it is discharging those functions in relation to community

councils and community council members.  It was explained that as that is not

applicable for this matter, the Committee’s community council members shall not

participate in this Hearing. 

Councillor Ieuan Williams, the Member who is subject of this hearing was introduced,

together with Annie Ginwalla, the Deputy Legal Advisor/Code of Conduct Team

Manager on behalf of the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales (PSOW), and Llinos

Lake, the PSOW’s Investigating Officer.

The following Officers of the Council were present in the meeting: -

a.  Miss Lynn Ball, Director of Function (Council Business)/Monitoring Officer

b.  Mrs Mared Yaxley, Legal Services Manager/Deputy Monitoring Officer

c.  Mrs Shirley Cooke, Committee Support/Officer

d.  Translation Team

To receive apologies for absence, including notifications of any changes to the membership of the Committee.

No apologies were received.

To receive any declaration of interest (personal or prejudicial) from a Member or Officer regarding any item of business.

Councillor Margaret Murley Roberts declared that she is a Councillor in the same ward as Councillor Ieuan Williams, but this did not constitute a personal interest.

Councillor Dafydd Rhys Thomas declared that he is a member of The Independent Group, of which Councillor Ieuan Williams is the Group Leader, and this did not constitute a personal interest.  He stated that he has previously sought legal advice from the Monitoring Officer, who has confirmed that he can participate in this Hearing.

To confirm that the Standards Committee is quorate.

The Chair confirmed that the meeting was quorate.

To outline the procedure which will be followed in determining the matter.

The Chair reported that to determine the matters at hand today, the Standards Committee would be following the procedure set out in the Council’s Procedure for Local Standards Hearings.

To determine whether the Hearing will exclude the press and public from all or

part of its consideration of the matter.

The Chair asked Councillor Williams, the Investigating Officer and the Council’s Legal Advisor whether they wished to ask the Standards Committee to exclude the press and public from all or any part of the Hearing.  The Chair stated that they would need to provide their reasons for doing so, to enable the Standards Committee to consider each request.

The Legal Advisor was asked whether she would like to make any request to the Committee to exclude the press and public from all or any part of the hearing?  The Legal Advisor responded that whilst the majority of Councillor Williams’ comments would be made publicly, she requested that the element of his statement relating to the effect this case has had on his personal wellbeing could be discussed with the press and public excluded.  She stated that, in her opinion, to share this information publicly, would break the expectation of privacy under the Data Protection Act 2018. 

The Legal Advisor proposed that this would lead to a reasonable balance between three different expectations, namely: -

a.  to hold the meeting publicly

b.  to protect the privacy of the individual; and,

c.  to ensure that the Committee is aware of the full picture, before concluding.

RESOLVED that the Standards Committee accepts the Legal Advisor’s request.

Councillor Williams was asked whether he would like to make any request to the Committee to exclude the press and public from all or any part of the hearing?  He responded that he sought the Standards Committee’s approval to exclude the press and the public during discussion on privacy elements.

RESOLVED that the Standards Committee accepts Councillor Williams’ request.

The Ombudsman’s Investigating Officer was asked whether she would like to make any request to the Committee to exclude the press and public from all or any part of the hearing?  She responded that usually, the Ombudsman supports the principle for hearings to be held in public, unless there is a valid reason for not doing so.  She referred to the Legal Advisor and Councillor Williams’ comments and stated that she did not object to them under the circumstances. 

RESOLVED that the Standards Committee accepts the Investigating Officer’s request.

(a)   PRESENTATION OF PRE-HEARING SUMMARY REPORT

 A report by the Legal Advisor, in particular highlighting any points identified by

 the Member where there is disagreement with any finding of fact on the

 Investigating Officer’s report.     

(b)   ADMISSION OF NON COMPLIANCE

To ask the Member whether they admit to failing to comply with the Code of Conduct.

(c)   DETERMINATION

To determine whether there has been a failure to comply with the Code of

Conduct.  

(a)    PRESENTATION OF PRE-HEARING SUMMARY REPORT

The Legal Advisor presented her Pre-Hearing Summary Report.  She stated that Councillor Ieuan Williams reported himself to the PSOW after commenting in an internal meeting of the Council on 12 June 2023, “bod

angen saethu pob Tory” (“all Tories should be shot”).

Following an investigation by the PSOW, the Investigator concluded that the elected member had breached two paragraphs of the Code of Conduct.  The matter was referred by the PSOW to the Council’s Monitoring Officer, with a direction that the matter be considered by the Standards Committee. 

In line with the process, an initial meeting of the Standards Committee was held on 26 February 2025, where a decision was made to proceed with conducting a hearing, to enable the Member to make representations in respect of the findings of the investigation.

The Legal Advisor reported that the Committee, on the balance of probabilities, would decide if the Member has breached the Code of Conduct for Members or not.  Following the Member’s comments and Investigating Officer’s representations, should the Committee decide that the Code has been breached, they will need to decide if a sanction is appropriate, and if so, what form of sanction?  Also, the Committee can make recommendations to the Councillor and/or the County Council. 

The Legal Advisor noted that the Investigating Officer’s Report is included in Appendix 2, together with her report.  She stated that her report draws specific attention to the bullet points at the bottom of pages 2-3 of the Investigating Officer’s Report.  The main points of the complaint have been listed in paragraph 1 of the Investigating Officer’s Report. namely, “paragraph 4(b) – [members] must show respect and consideration for others”, and “paragraph 6(1)(a) [members] must not conduct [themselves] in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing [their] office or authority into disrepute”. 

The Legal Advisor also highlighted relevant elements in the PSOW’s Guidelines on the Code of Conduct in Appendix 8 of the Investigating Officer’s Report.  She stated that events relating to the case have been summarised in Paragraphs 11-19 of the report.   Paragraphs 20–46 summarise evidence from witness statements of individuals who were present in the meeting.  The Investigating Officer’s findings are presented in Paragraphs 56-64, and state that the Investigator is of the opinion that Paragraphs 6(1)(a) has been breached.  There was also no disagreement regarding the facts of the case, being a self-referral complaint by the Member, where it is apparent that the Code has been breached. 

Following the initial decision of the Standards Committee to conduct today’s hearing, the process was followed whereby the Member was asked to complete the pre-hearing forms (Appendix 3 of the report).  In his response, the Member confirmed that he was not in disagreement with the facts in the Investigating Officer's Report and the Legal Advisor's Pre-Hearing Summary Report.

The Legal Advisor reported that if the Committee comes to a decision that the Code has been breached, there will be a need to decide on any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

(a)   CHAIR’S INDICATION OF THE ORDER OF SANCTION

The Chair to set out the order of sanction which is considered appropriate.

(b)   MEMBER’S REPRESENTATIONS AS TO SANCTION

To invite the Member to make representations on sanction.

(c)   INVESTIGATING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIONS AS TO

       SANCTION     

To invite the Investigating Officer to make representations on sanction.

(d)   STANDARD COMMITTEE TO CONFIRM WHETHER THEY HAVE

        SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO FORM A VIEW ON SANCTION

To allow for questions to be addressed to the Member and/or Investigating Officer.

a)  CHAIR’S INDICATION OF THE ORDER OF SANCTION

The Chair reported that considering the determination that Councillor Williams has failed to comply with the Code of Conduct in the manner detailed in the Investigating Officer’s Report, this Committee was required to consider: -

a.  Whether to impose a sanction;

b.  Having due regard to the Adjudication Panel for Wales’ Sanctions

     Guidance (where a sanction is to be imposed) what sanction to

     impose;

c.  When any sanction must take effect; and

d.  Any recommendation which the Standards Committee would make to the

     Council.

The Chair reported that the Council’s Procedure for Local Standards Hearings provides four decisions that are available to this Committee, and which may be appropriate in this matter, namely:

a.  That no action is required;

b.  Censure the Member;

c.  Partial suspension of the Member for a period up to a maximum of six

     months or the remainder of the Member’s term of office, whichever is the

     shorter period;

d.  Suspension of the Member for a period up to a maximum of six months or

     the remainder of the Member’s term of office, whichever is  the shorter

     period.

The Chair reiterated the Standards Committee’s earlier agreement to exclude the press and public from the specific element of discussion on sanctions.

The Chair suggested that Councillor Williams and the Ombudsman’s Investigating Officer make their representations, in the first instance, and then exclude the press and public from the meeting to hear those further representations that are to be discussed in private.

(b)  MEMBERS REPRESENTATIONS AS TO SANCTIONS

Councillor Williams was asked if he would like to make any representations on sanctions at this point?  He replied that he did not at this point.

(c)  INVESTIGATING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIONS AS TO SANCTIONS

The Ombudsman’s Investigating Officer was afforded an opportunity to present the Ombudsman’s representations on sanctions, which she accepted.

The Ombudsman’s Investigating Officer, Llinos Lake reported that based on the case of a breach of the Code that has been accepted by the Member and highlighted by this Committee today, it was now a matter for the Committee to decide whether there should be a sanction, and if so, what type of sanction that should be.

To assist the Committee in formulating its decision, she referred to the Adjudication Panel for Wales’ Guidance on sanction.  She offered to send a copy of the Guidance to the Standards Committee.  Paragraph 18 of the Guidance outlines the reasoning behind the sanction process: -

(a)  To provide a disciplinary response to a case where an individual member has breached the Code;

(b)  To produce a public record of the misconduct and the appropriate sanction;

(c)  To ensure that the individual or anyone else does not behave in an improper manner in future;

(d)  To promote a culture of compliance across the relevant authorities, and to foster public confidence in local democracy.

The Investigating Officer reported that, considering the Adjudication Panel for Wales’ Guidance in relation to the severity of the breach of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

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

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: -