EARLY ONE MORNING.........................
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Stansted North on Uttlesford District Council and former Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group Learn more
by Alan Dean on 11 November, 2021
The Bishop’s Stortford Independent yesterday published a new, on-line story about a longstanding investigation by Essex Police into possible criminality within Uttlesford District Council. The report can be read here.
The public at least now knows that the Essex Police are referring that case to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for discussions.
This is what the CPS does:
Can we assume that this case is at the second stage? After all, the case has been under investigation since early in 2020.
There is no avoiding the fact that the causes of the police investigation have damaged Uttlesford District Council’s reputation, especially because it has resulted in Uttlesford’s external auditors refusing to sign-off the Council’s annual accounts for two whole years. That’s because the Chief Executive and the Council Leader cannot truthfully sign off UDC’s Annual Government Statement (AGS). The AGS is a document that affirms that the Council is being run properly. (It can be read at pages 113-127 of the document linked here. It is unsigned at page 127.)
On December 8th 2020 – almost a year ago – Conservative, Green and Liberal Democrat Members tabled a motion calling for good governance to be restored and for those responsible for the hiatus to stand aside, at least until the police investigation had been concluded. The motion was heavily defeated by R4U and Independent Members. See item C66 in the meeting’s minutes. Not only did a majority of the Council vote not to restore Uttlesford’s governance to an auditable good standard; they voted down the Nolan Principles that underpin national Standards in Public Life.
Such was and still is the absence of integrity, political backbone and good governance within and from the Residents for Uttlesford Party.
It is the responsibility of all elected councillors to do whatever they can to ensure that the Council is properly run. Therefore, the newspaper’s quotations from the leaders of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat groups are most correctly focussed on good governance and proper behaviour. The Green group is preparing a statement for the newspaper (and a response was subsequently issued).
What is surprising, if not shameful, is that the 26-strong Residents for Uttlesford (R4U) Administration party has not provided an explanation about what is going on and what they intend to do about it. As far as I am aware, they have done nothing but fret behind closed doors.
What is shocking in the Independent newspaper’s article is the response printed from the two Independent Members of Council. They say they have “no party axe to grind…the matter is being exploited for party political ends aimed at undermining the administration”.
Are they blind to their responsibilities? Do they take no responsibility for internal bad governance? Do they have no group rules and discipline standards like those of the Lib Dems and Tories that would require Members who were under investigation by the police over a serious matter to vacate roles of significant responsibility until such issues are settled? The Independent councillors sadly undermine their own credibility by their attacking of councillors who are trying to uphold as important the Standards in Public Life/Nolan Principles.
I hope the Independents will change their story and comment before next week’s likely print version of the Independent’s story. The public has had enough of bad behaviour from Westminster in the past week. Let’s clean up Uttlesford!
I also hope that the Residents for Uttlesford Party, which – it would seem – also lacks internal standards and discipline rules, will soon come into the open by saying and doing the right thing. They could start by replying to the Independent and telling district residents where they stand on good governance and Standards in Public Life.
This week, the Prime Minister proclaimed in Glasgow “I genuinely believe that the UK is not remotely a corrupt country”. I genuinely want to believe the same about politics at Uttlesford District Council.
6 Comments
We would like to thank Councillor Dean for his commitment to robust political debate and accountability, we respect that approach.
Anyone with the vaguest understanding of British politics over the past 160 years appreciates the debt of gratitude we owe to the Liberal Party, in large measure they invented the modern world – universal suffrage, old age pensions, home rule, abortion rights, legalisation of homosexuality – all these progressive changes we owe to the Liberals. Names such as Asquith, Lloyd-George, Grimond and Steel that echo down history.
That is perhaps why we are baffled and distressed by the approach now taken in Uttlesford by their spiritual inheritors, the Liberal Democrats.
Let us explain. The principles of “due process” and “presumption of innocence” are at the heart of the canon of Liberalism and to abandon them for short term possible political gain is a deeply questionable approach.
If individuals at UDC are discovered to have been guilty of wrongdoing at the end of the police investigation currently underway, then the most robust sanctions reflecting such a breach of public trust should be imposed. However, that investigative process needs to be concluded and not short circuited in an expedient rush to judgement. To do otherwise leads to miscarriages of justice and is indicative of “cancel culture” where mere accusation becomes de facto conviction without the need for inconvenient evidence. Such an approach also encourages malicious allegations.
We agree entirely with Cllr Dean about the need for the highest standards in public life, that must include the great Liberal and liberal principles of justice and fairness for all, no matter our personal feelings towards any individual.
Cllr Richard Pavitt and Cllr Neil Gregory
Independent Members of UDC
“Innocent until proven guilty” is too simplistic. As the police stated in their media comment, this is a complex investigation.
Back in July, the Vote of No Confidence in the administration asked for the person[s] involved in the police investigation to stand down, step aside and do the right thing. A police investigation into the activities of any Council representative is very serious. A direct impact on the Council has been the refusal by auditors to sign off the UDC accounts. That is serious also.
It is known that matters were taken to the CEO of UDC and that these were of such magnitude that it was impossible for internal systems to handle them. The police were brought in and investigations began. Officers from the Volume Fraud Team, Serious Economic Crime Unit and Complex Fraud, Bribery and Corruption Department have been investigating for almost two years.
The police media comment informs us those matters are with the Crown Prosecution Service.
Charges may or may not be issued. The matters may go to court, or not. What is clear though is that these are serious issues.
While all this has been progressing through the criminal investigation system, those involved have remained in post. I understand that the Liberal Democrat Party, Conservative Party and Labour Party have internal systems that would require those at the centre of major ‘issues’, particularly involving the police, to step aside until matters are concluded. The Residents for Uttlesford political administration at Uttlesford has failed to act.
It should also be remembered that there are victims. While some have the privilege of public voice, victims usually must remain silent. Great pain has been suffered during the last two years. Huge impacts have driven some away from vocations they loved and communities they enjoyed.
Innocent until proven guilty just doesn’t fit.
These matters are playing out in Council. Under the Nolan Principals, a higher standard is required. Let’s see those higher standards now and whoever is involved resign or at least step aside.
UDC should never have been put in a position where the police have to intervene.
We welcome Cllr Isham’s remarks.
Much of local politics, of necessity, focuses on the practical so it is interesting to debate broader issues when we have the chance.
We fear Cllr Isham has perhaps made our point more concisely and accurately than we ever could have.
“Innocent until proven guilty” is indeed simplistic. Magnificently so. That is the root of it’s power. A simple but crystal clear maxim that allows no waiver is the surest way to prevent miscarriages of justice. We have all in our lifetimes seen what happens when that rule is broken or bent because “circumstances dictated” – that way lies the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six – not just miscarriages of justice but allowing the guilty to go free.
We prefer that the wheels of justice grind slow, as long as they grind fine.
Indeed as the Founding Fathers of the USA so succintly put it – our preference is for a “government of law, not a government of men”. We appreciate this may at times be uncomfortable, but we contend it is preferable to the alternatives.
Finally, Cllr Isham is clearly more informed about some of the facts of this case than we are. For the record as a member and substitute member of Standards Ctee at UDC we have, and will continue, to avoid finding out more of the facts because this matter may come to us in the future for adjudication and we need to maintain dispassionate objectivity.
Richard and Neil
So Pavitt and Gregory are tied at the hip, are they? I find it astonishing, and troubling, that any councillor who claims to be a member of the Standards Committee would say anything at all about this issue. The comments that they have already made give reason to believe there would be a bias to any decision. I for one will be objecting to either of them sitting in consideration of anything relating to this case that might end up at the Standards Committee.
The interesting point Cllr Gregory makes about me possibly knowing more than some other Councillors raises an intriguing issue_ namely being informed.
Item 2 of the Motion of Vote of No Confidence brought to Full Council, 28 June 2021 called for the parties involved in the on-going police investigation to stand aside. This was not the first public mention of the police investigation. In December 2020, another Vote of No Confidence also raised the police investigation as an issue.
At that point, if not before, Councillors had the duty to satisfy themselves that no offenses were on-going. I assume every Councillor and particularly Members of Cabinet gathered sufficient information to reassure themselves everything was correct and proper in Council. I spoke with the then CEO and was given as much detail as was correctly and appropriately available. It is only right that Councillors ask questions and be sure that what details are available from safe sources are fully explored. This is fact gathering, investigation and carrying out one’s duty to ensure sound governance.
It has been claimed by some Councillors, that serious allegations, the police involvement, and investigation into Member[s] of Council is somehow ‘normal’. That is an extraordinary view that I do not hold. The requirement for a Police investigation into any Member is deeply worrying.
I understand that there is a possibility that a senior Member of the political administration is considering resigning. Could that possibly be a damage limitation exercise? If so, why now? At the Vote of No Confidence, the Motion called for those involved to stand aside. The 13 Councillors who signed the Motion lost the voted. All other Councillors opposed, supporting silence and ignoring the issues.
On the point of innocent until proved guilty, to sit by when a possible crime is being committed would be like watching an assault or robbery and excusing this inaction as innocent until proven guilty. No-one suggested that anyone should be punished without due process, but the reputation and financial health of the council is damaged by no one stepping “aside”. In waiting until the law has taken its course a Councillor is not discharging their duty but putting their heads in the sand and standing by. Pleading “independence” is not defending the rights of the residents.
Well said Cllr Isham and we’ll done for pursuing your actions to get to the truth.
Hopefully the truth will emerge and all those involved in this appalling subterfuge and avoidance of taking responsibility for the standards and governance of the council will be outed.
No-one is above the law. There is an inherent distasteful air about the current ruling party at Uttlesford in the way they conduct business and manipulate the public. Anyone remotely associated with them either directly or by defending them should hold their heads in shame.