Can A parish Councillor be removed by way of a motion

Question

We have a very Vexatious councillor that has led to the resignation of our assistant clerk and contributed to others resigning in the past.

The councillor continuously bombards the clerk with emails, taking up a vast amount of their time creating a toxic environment for both clerks and councillors.
The person undermines the clerk, questions EVERYTHING they do. Surely the clerks should be encouraged and assisted in their roles so both councillors and clerks work harmoniously to represent the community.

The councillor has been asked to resign by other councillors but refuses. They have been asked to stop the vexatious emails but it falls on deaf ears. Surely there must be a way to remove them from post in order that the council can move forward and stop wasting time fulfilling the needs of one councillor.

Answer 1

A councillor cannot be removed.  You can raise a complaint to the Monitoring Officer but they have no teeth and can only suggest (not require) training.

Comments

Thats disappointing to hear, but I suspected as much. It likely we will lose our clerk in the very near future because of this person vexatious approach.

Answer 2

Can you give us some examples of vexatious issues being raised by this miscreant then...  Surely it is not considered as vexatious just because they are asking questions that others have neither the interest nor intellect to ask?
It is often the case that what one side thinks of as "vexatious" the other side thinks of as diligent.

Have you even considered that the issue may actually be 1 diligent Cllr and a majority of ill informed, incompetent and/or lazy Cllrs being encouraged (even by the clerk) to view the other side as vexatious because their own inadequacies are being exposed?

Give us something to make a judgement on rather than just 1 side of the story....

Comments

The councillor is sending numerous emails to other councillors and clerks continuously. If no answer is received in a short period time further emails are send. The councillor questions every move the clerk makes, making the working environment toxic. It is less to do with the having different views on a matter and more on the way things are handled. He takes up a disproportionate amount of the clerks and chairs time. He wants to save the council money but ends up costing money cause of his actions.

---

Cllr sends email...
Clerk required to answer a question...

 (somebody should possibly point out this is (probably) in the job spec and definitely in the Freedom of Information Act 2000)

I'm familiar with this scenario.

Cllr asks perfectly reasonable question and get gibberish in response.

Cllr asks perfectly reasonable question AGAIN due to previous gibberish (having to waste their time reiterating that which has already gone before.)   (This cycle repeats)
Person receiving perfectly reasonable question has adverse reaction to being told they have not answered the perfectly reasonable question.

Person receiving perfectly reasonable question then spends more time trying to find ways to avoid answering perfectly reasonable question than it would have actually taken to simply answer the perfectly reasonable question whilst claiming that 'somebody else' is at fault because they couldn't answer a perfectly reasonable question....
Evidence to date indicates what you more likely have is 1 diligent Cllr and the remainder perhaps not so much so and possibly a clerk that thinks they are above scrutiny.

I remain open (but less than optimistic) to being convinced otherwise....

---

Gosh your tone is exactly that of the person concerned.

Do you an answer to my question?

---

I probably share the frustration of the person you refer to as vexatious....  As I said, I am familiar with this scenario.

The answer to your question is NO, there is nothing you can, or should, do in relation to a Cllr asking questions.  Well, you 'could' try and have a long hard think about what it is that is being asked and why it is seemingly such an issue to have someone asking questions....
Post up 1 example of a vexatious question and the answer which was provided to it.  I'll wager it will be the answer rather than the question where the problem lies....

---

Hi Again you don't seem to understand the question, I am not here to loo for a definition of vexatious, Google can tell me that perfectly well.
I am asking if myself, several other councillors and the clerk can do anything about this individual.

Many thanks for your replies

---

Simple solution. If councillor is unhappy then the employment committee should receive a complaint ( using complaints policy) that the employee is not carrying out their duty in fielding a councillors request to answer emails.
If the clerk is not happy then they should as stated make a complaint to the committee. Either way the committee should investigate the matter from both sides and act as mediator in resolving the matter.

---

Thank you, that is the route that is currently being explored, but wha power does the employment committee have on a councillor? I

---

The committee has no powers. Case law exists on this - R(Harvey) v Ledbury Town Council. The high court ruled the council acted unlawfully by handling a complaint themselves rather then it going to the MO. You might get lucky and the councillor would just swallow whatever sanction you impose on them. But from what you say they don't sound like that kind of person, so you would be open to legal challenge.

---

No one made mention of power over a councillor. The clerk is an employee of the council and as such will have a defined contract of employment which includes a defined complaints procedure. The council will also have a defined complaints procedure that can be used to make a complaint against the council
The employment committee has the ability to field, investigate and act on complaints made against or by an employee. If the employee does not agree with any decisions made by the employer there will be defined procedures to follow up to and including tribunal access.
Councils cannot "punish" councillors for their actions only refer the matter to the MO in the case of alleged code of conduct breaches.
If a councillor requires the answer to a question then they can follow the laid down procedures to enable the question to be dealt with on a council meeting agenda.

---

There is no mention of the ‘subject’ wanting to make a complaint about an employee in the OP.
Just (presumably) another Cllr having already acted as judge, jury and executioner seeking an answer to how they can dispose of a sitting Cllr.
They can’t is the answer - I rather doubt there is even a vexatious Cllr - more likely there is a bunch of muppets feeling threatened by their historic incompetence being highlined.
I very much hope the so-called vexatious Cllr is reading this and redoubles their scrutiny

---

I have to say I’m terribly glad I don’t sit on your council. Your sound like an awful individual.

---

Don’t worry - it’s  mutual

---

There is no worry. This seems to be an extremely negative forum. I shall take my leave

---

I’ll interpret that as you asking a question but really just seeking positive affirmation of a preconceived but poorly informed starting point.
You didn’t get the answer you wanted so the forum is at fault….

Maybe the ‘problem’ isn’t your “vexatious” Cllr after all….?

Before taking the spec out of your brother’s eye consider the plank in your own….

---

If its any help, I decided months ago to ignore the comments/opinions of RAC and never to engage with or respond to them.

---

And yet there you are...  engaging );0)


If there were a top ten of "frailties" which are responsible for the pitiful state of the local government sector, I'd put inability / refusal / hissy fit to accept inalienable truth / reality which conflicts with one's predetermined state of mind (especially when coexisting with an observable lack of experience / knowledge / critical thinking) very much towards the top of that perpetual top 10.


The inability to objectively consider a point of view which differs from one's own is a dreadful weakness....

---

As I have said, whilst I usually enjoy our differences of opinion there are times when you forget that people who post questions on this forum do so because they genuinely want guidance not your personal opinion.  We should be supporting each other not attacking people for their views, whether you think they're misguided or not.  The sector is riddled with flaws at every level and those who want to make a real difference to their communities have to learn to work with the system as well as acknowledge the difficulties.

---

sounds wise to me

---

As always there can be two sides to every story.  Both sides should realise that the ultimate goal of any Council is to provide a quality service to the electorate .  While clerks are paid and fully supported by various organisations Councillors receive no such support and sometimes asking questions is the only way forward.  Don't know what the answer is but the complete unaccountability of PCs does not help. Makes the current Conservative /Labour spats look like a garden party

---

Jacko I would argue that what some se as unaccountability etc is in fact a great strength unique to PC's in facilitating what a council should be doing in working unfettered  for the good of their community.
 Councillors and clerks should be bound tightly to the Nolan principles ( unlike all others in public life it seems) . Personal ambition, agendas and kudos seeking should have no place in this first tier of government( closest to the people) . If we get it right then the electorate will come to expect ( and get) higher standards and principles of their elected bodies thereby becoming more intolerant of personal and party agendas and corruption. If the roots are infected then so is the whole tree.
The solution is in our lowly hands to give our communities ( and thereby the nation) higher expectations of us rather than apathy which rots the system. Apathy closes your eyes to what is done in your name. Here endeth the sermon!

---

Mentorman I agree completely .  Sadly though Utopia does not exist

---

And never will unless those with the abilities, desire, dedication and selflessness become the majority  for seeking election to office

Answer 3

In almost all cases, there is no way to remove a councillor except when periodic elections come up. Then it is up to the electorate.

One answer is to use the facilities provided by most email systems to block or divert emails from someone who is agreed to be a troublemaker. (If the email system doesn't support this, get a better one).

In the past I have been involved in doing this, where a councillor was deemed to be harassing the clerk. Their emails were diverted to a couple of supportive councillors. The clerk did not see them. Any genuinely important issue was handled by the councillors, with the clerk's involvement if appropriate.

If there are no councillors willing to take this role, then the emails could simply be rejected and the councillor in question told that they can only contact the clerk in writing. That would almost certainly at least slow them down.

I'm afraid there is no complete answer to difficult councillors.

Comments

It is true as DTC once said "only Councillors can change things" .  The problem is we recruit so many useless Councillors that in some cases Clerks have to take up the slack and do extra work.  However, if in amongst these "useless Councillors" there is one with an enquiring mind some clerks can react and single that Councillor out as a trouble maker.   The only deciding factor then  is how many you have got in your gang.  What I am saying is that whilst  I recognise the OPs dilemma,  I also recognise RAGs point of view (as I have been there) ... well currently still am

---

There’s a flip-side to CPs point about a clerk / council seeking to suppress a Cllr by restricting email functionality.
It is also possible that the Cllr can withdraw their consent to be served papers electronically.
So a ‘council’ or parts thereof might think they are being clever by suppressing an individual Cllr but what could then happen is they will find themselves incurring time and mileage expense of hand delivering summons / agenda etc.
It’s a 2 way street.
By far and away the simplest, most effective and sensible approach is NOT to create barriers but rather to strive to understand and accommodate alternative views.
Often the most vocal for inclusivity are actually the least invested in it.

Answer 4

It’s all starting to become clearer now…..

A PC with a vice chair that wants to remove other Cllrs….

It is quite clear now where the real problem lays….

Answer 5

A bit late to comment - but just catching up on the posts. Having seen similar behaviour in the past I was curious when you said the assistant clerk had resigned. Made me wonder about the makeup of you council. How many staff do you employ - do you have a separate RFO? How big is your council, and what is the Chairman doing about the situation? Is this another council where the Chairman and his/her cronies run the show? Perhaps this 'vexatious' cllr is doing what they are supposed to do?

Answer 6

We had a Councillor like that who just wouldn’t accept that they had no right to question things or put motions on the Agenda also they wouldn’t accept the authority of the Clerk to run the Parish Council
To prevent further trouble making the Councillor was “ sent to Coventry “ and the only way they could get information was via the FOI

Even when responding to FOI requests both the Clerk and the Chair publicly resorted to personal attacks and refused to provide information or claimed it was lost

Eventually the Councillor self reported the complaints and a prolonged and extensive  investigation concluded the councillor had done nothing wrong as the wild claims about the said councillor some of which were extremely serious were proved to be false as the Councillor had clear evidence to the contrary
No action was taken about the people responsible for misleading the Monitoring Officer and the other month at a Public meeting the Clerk accused the Chair of being a liar and nothing happened
I was that Councillor so as you can see there can be two sides to every coin