council chair lying

Question

thanks for lettingme join , i was a pc member for  a number of years until we got a new chair who got rid of me as ' i wasnt a yes man '
since ive left there has been a vendetta by chair to stop me rejoining ( not that i want to ) , it centres round a lawnmower we purchased when i was on council and she has tried to prove sometihng about it was ' dodgy '
ive asked them on many times questions by email and never had replies
it reached my ears a rumour was spread that ' i ripped council off '
i attended the last meeting with a number of other villagers and asked them , their answer was ' there had been a serious police investigation into matter and they were not allowed to speak to me '

i was never contacted by police
i afte rmeeting spoke to police who confirmed they had not record of an investigation ie chair lied
i contacted clerk ( who then resigned ) asking for a crime number and he then backtracked saying itwas a ' informal police investigation '
i beleive the chair lied to coucillors and the whole investigation was a fantasy of hers
so the next meeting is now due today , the agenda doesnt cover this or other serious issues in village and they discuss everything controvercial under councillors reports and therefore wont let me speak on this or anothe rmatter where they paid a contracor ( related to chair ) a large sum of money upfront for a job thats never been finished they then got another contracotr who also hasnt done correctly
they have also after requests from anothe ressident ended up with a foi comissioner demanding they provide information or be in contempt of high court this has never been in agendas and we think only chair and old clerk aware
its a real mess how is best to tackle this

Answer 1

How did the chair get rid of you? Who is a councillor is not for the chair to decide, that's for the public to decide.

How best to tackle it depends on what outcome you want. You have not been clear on this. From what i can see you no longer wish to be a part of the council and there is no police investigation into you. Maybe you just walk away and leave them to it, leave the drama behind and get on with your life.

However if you feel the actions of an elected councillor fall below the standards expected of them, and you feel they should be held to account for this, then your only real option is to submit a complaint to the monitoring officer. Don't expect the monitoring officer to deliver the outcome you wish, they rarely do.

Answer 2

- To address the first point no specific mechanism for any individual to "get rid" though appreciate individuals lives can be made so miserable they they feel no option but to leave to escape (I came so so close to leaving)
- In relation to the outstanding FOI the ICO Decision Notice will be on their website. So ensure they all have a copy of it... Then nobody can claim were not aware... None compliance does have AGAR implications as well.
- In terms of potentially innacurate statements made some will signpost to monitoring officer(s) as a standards matter but honestly if yours is anything like the regime down here unless you literally were dropkicked to the floor they not interested.
- Next Meeting cooly and calmly ask a series of questions and ask for a retraction. Follow it up with a letter to Council & letter directly addressed to Chair of Council asking for retraction & apology making it quite clear prepared to take it further as consider comments defamatory (and no such thing as privilege in a parish council meeting)

Comments

There is such a thing as qualified privilege in council meetings. See the case of Horrocks v Lowe [1975. The judge ruled " what is said by members of a local council at meetings of the council or of any of its
committees is spoken on a privileged occasion. The reason for the privilege
is that those who represent the local government electors should be able to
speak freely and frankly, boldly and bluntly, on any matter when they believe
affects the interests or welfare of the inhabitants. They may be swayed by
strong political prejudice, they may be obstinate and pig-headed, stupid and
obtuse; but they were chosen by the electors to speak their minds on
matters of local concern and so long as they do so honestly they run no risk
of liability for defamation of those who are the subjects of their criticism"

So as long as there was not any malice involved qualified privilege can be used as a defence to defamation. Was this malice? Depends on our view whether lawnmower gate was created purely to cause damage to the OP, or instead was  purely to investigate potential misuse of council funds.