SNP councillors have failed in an attempt to have a Labour councillor suspended from committee duties ahead of a standards hearing.
All seven of Stirling’s SNP councillors called for the special meeting, held last Thursday, demanding Councillor Danny Gibson be removed from all committee and external positions where he represents Stirling Council pending the outcome of a Standards Commission hearing on June 21.
Councillor Gibson is accused of breaching the Councillors’ Code of Conduct on issues of “respect and courtesy” and those relating to taking decisions on “quasi-judicial or regulatory applications”.
At last Thursday’s meeting, a number of councillors declared an interest in the matter and withdrew from the meeting, including Councillor Gibson himself.
Independent councillor Alasdair Macpherson also declared an interest, as did SNP group leader Scott Farmer, who said he had been asked “to give a substantive written statement” to the standards authority.
Councillor Martin Earl and fellow Conservative Provost Douglas Dodds also withdrew along with Green councillor Alasdair Tollemache.
Click here for more news and sport from the Stirling area.
SNP councillor Gerry McLaughlan argued that a standards investigation had already established that there had been a breach of the code and that was why Councillor Gibson had been referred to the Standards Commission, making an amendment put forward by Labour councillor Margaret Brisley incompetent.
However, legal officials advised that the amendment - which said the commission was the appropriate body to determine whether any breach had occurred and, if so, what sanctions should be applied - was competent. It was later backed by 11 votes, from Labour and Conservative councillors, to six from SNP councillors.
Councillor McLaughlan said were members of staff to be in the same type of position, they would be suspended from duties pending the outcome of any action.
He added: “It’s unfortunate we find ourselves in this position today. We had hoped Councillor Gibson would have stepped back on his own initiative. We then hoped his group would have advised him to step back pending the hearing, but again that’s not happened. We as a council group have a duty of care and responsibility for the culture we wish to prevail in this council.
“We have a responsibility to council staff and to ourselves. It’s modest request but one that sends a message to our staff that it’s not one rule for us and another for them.”
However, Councillor Brisley, the council’s longest-serving member, said there was a “laid down procedure” for councillors.
“I have been here a very long time and it’s not often this happens,” she said, “but when it has happened in the past - and there have been a couple of occasions I have been aware of prior to this where a councillor has been referred to the Standards Commission - this council took the view that the matter would go to the hearing and the hearing decided the outcome and what, if any, sanction would be imposed on the councillor.
“Nobody likes to be in that position. Even when you know you have done nothing wrong and that’s the outcome at the end of the day, it’s not pleasant.
“But the Standards Commission has the power, if they feel any breach is so serious, to suspend the councillor pending the outcome of the hearing. In none of the circumstances I have known has any councillor been suspended prior to the outcome of the hearing. At the end of the hearing, whatever sanction was imposed, that was then the matter finished.”
Councillor Brisley said the council had never tried to preempt a decision of the commission and “it would be wrong to start preempting it now”, adding: “It would be totally wrong if any council started to use this body as a weapon against any councillor and use it for political ends.”
