Standard practice

We’re not sure why the Lib Dems (or at least some of them) think that it is good idea to slag off the Standards Committee - even if they are clearly unhappy with the outcome in the matter of Peter Black versus Gethin Evans.

However, and whatever the Spinning Chicken blogsite may attempt to claim, the published verdict of the committee is that there was no evidence of any failure to comply with the Members' Code of Conduct and that therefore no further action is to be taken in respect of the matter which was the subject of the investigation.

This all refers to an unsuccessful allegation by Lib Dem complainant Black that the Labour councillor over-stepped the mark when he revealed how a disciplinary committee opted to give a former director, under investigation for his role in the closure of the leisure centre, an early retirement package - on the casting vote of the Lib Dem chairman.

Far from being unprecedented, the action of the Standards Committee is actually very similar to that which it took when it disagreed with the Ombudsman that coalition cabinet member Gareth Sullivan had borught his office into disrepute by misleading Council during question time over a trip to China. But the opportunity for such a comparison seems to have eluded the Lib Dem spinners.

And we’re not sure why they are in an uproar over the suggestion of a reminder going out to all members about their duty in respect of confidential information.

After all, we seem to remember that the same action was taken following an official enquiry into how a confidential letter sent to Lib Dem Sylvia Lewis about a Labour colleague somehow got itself photocopied and pushed through letterboxes in the Clydach area.

Anyway, the report can be seen in full on the Council’s website - just as soon as the link is fixed.