Councillor in two-month suspension for 'political collusion' claims

A councillor has been handed a two-month suspension for breaching the code of conduct with social media posts slating "the council and Labour's PR machine".

Standards bosses said Councillor Greg Lennon had "effectively accused" the chief executive of North Lanarkshire Council, Des Murray, of taking politically-motivated decisions.

In a social media post and an email to a constituent, Lennon – who represents Gartcosh, Glenboig and Moodiesburn – referred to a review of facilities ordered by the council.

Lennon, who leads the seven-member Progressive Change NL group, said the "timing and process" of the move were "suspect" and suggested its "real purpose" was to "create a crisis and overturn it to gain votes for both the Labour and Conservative groups" on the 77-member local authority, which is the second largest in the country.

Lennon also referred to "the council and Labour's PR machine".

However, the decision to undertake the review had been made by elected members at a council meeting in February 2023.

The matter was passed to a watchdog and, after a disciplinary hearing in Airdrie, members of the Standards Commission for Scotland (SCS) imposed a two-month suspension.

Helen Donaldson, Standards Commission member and chair of the hearing panel, said: “The panel found that, in both his post and email, Councillor Lennon effectively accused the chief executive both of going beyond his remit and of not being politically neutral by stating that he (along with the council leader) had initiated the review and by inferring that this had been done for political reasons."

North Lanarkshire Council spans 21 wards, with Labour's Jim Logue in place as council leader.

The Standards Commission said Murray had been responsible for implementing, not initiating, the review.

The panel said Lennon had the right to criticise a decision by fellow councillors, but his conduct towards officers had been "disrespectful and discourteous".

It said the suggestion of failure by officers to maintain political neutrality was a "serious allegation" and Murray had had no right of reply.

The panel noted "evidence of apparent problems" in the relationship between the Progressive Change NL group and council officers.

The comments could have caused reputational damage, it said, and amendments to the post did not go far enough to remedy the issue. 

Donaldson said: “The code of conduct does not prevent councillors from being able to express their views and opinions. The panel accepted that Councillor Lennon was unhappy with the decision taken by fellow councillors to review council facilities and that he had sought to raise publicly his concerns in this regard. The panel agreed, however, there was no reason why he could not have done so without knowingly suggesting, incorrectly, that the chief executive was involved in instigating the review and, further, by inferring this had been done for political reasons. 

"The Standards Commission considers that adherence to the code helps maintain the mutual bond of trust and confidence between councillors and officers which, in turn, enables local government to function effectively. It also protects officers from offensive attacks that could potentially undermine the public’s confidence in them and the council itself." 

A full written decision will be published on the Standards Commission website.

Responding to the finding, Lennon confirmed his intention to appeal and said the process revealed "deep-seated bias and procedural failings" within the operation of the watchdog.

Referring to a probe by the Ethical Standards Commissioner, Lennon said his right to free speech was "clearly protected" under human rights law and said no individual had been named in his second Facebook post, made after edits.

He said: "No reasonable person could conclude this was directed at any specific council officer or service. Yet, the panel chose to uphold the complaint."

Lennon said a formal complaint has been made to the Scottish Commissioner for Standards (SCS) and the Information Commissioner's Office in relation to his case.

Describing the censure imposed as "excessive", Lennon said: "Worse still, the SCS issued a press release about the hearing outcome hours before formally notifying me—an egregious breach of basic procedure and respect.  

"I will appeal this decision with the sheriff principal and have initiated a formal process to request a full government review of the SCS’s unchecked powers."