LGA peer review calls on council to address 'toxic' behaviour of members

Thanet District Council has failed to tackle ‘toxic’ behaviour by councillors, which has been a key factor in damage to its public reputation.

That was among findings by a Local Government Association peer review, which praised aspects of the council’s work but called on it to rebuild public respect.

Publication of the report was swiftly followed by a fresh bout of in-fighting at the no overall control council, when Labour leader Clive Hart resigned citing, among other grievances, a long-running dispute with Green party councillor Ian Driver.

Thanet was due yesterday (Thursday) to elect a new leader.

The peer review followed a highly critical report on councillors’ behaviour written by the four independent members of Thanet’s standards committee last November. The four resigned en masse after the committee voted to return the report for further consideration. Their report had noted that the public saw council meetings “as a form of entertainment”.

According to the LGA review team: “Instances of corruption in the near and far past have shaped your reputation and the continuing behaviours of politicians have only reinforced the negative impressions which people have of the council.

“You feel, and we agree, that there has been some evidence of improvement in behaviours and relationships between politicians in recent months. Sustained and rapid improvement in this area is critically important.”

But they said Thanet had not addressed “some behaviours which we described as ‘toxic’. We found examples of antagonism, hostility, homophobia and discourtesy in the way that some councillors behave.

“There is an unwillingness to respect the confidentiality of some aspects of council business which are appropriately confidential. Many unfounded allegations have been made against senior officers who, whilst being held to account, are also owed a duty of care by the council.

“This behaviour must be tackled if you are going to improve community confidence in the council.”

The report recommended that the council seek the advice of the LGA, “particularly in respect of the most extreme behaviours”, and that there should be mandatory training for members on equalities.

It said some views had been expressed during their visit implying that Thanet’s reputational difficulties were entirely the result of a small number of councillors.

But the reviewers wrote: “Whilst we agree that some of those behaviours are extremely corrosive, we witnessed the poor behaviours of many other councillors during our visit. Barracking, bullying and talking over others are behaviours, which also damage the council’s reputation.

“There are things that all councillors can and should do to set an example and improve the reputation of the council including listening respectfully to the contributions of others, avoiding the use of personal insults and involvement in councillor training and development.”

The LGA review team said that a change in behaviour would help to change Thanet’s reputation and an improved reputation built on new standards of behaviour was the most important challenge the authority faced.

“As a review team we recognise the enormous reputational challenges that Thanet faces,” the report said. “We saw that you have many strengths in the council in which you should take pride and which could take centre stage if your reputation improved.”

Overall, the key messages from the peer team were:

• The council’s reputation was of critical importance;
• Thanet needed to clarify what it wanted to achieve and how it was going to do it and then put the appropriate resources in place – “a rationalised set of priorities would drive the Medium Term Financial Plan;
• Work was needed to improve trust, respect and visibility;
• The council needed to develop and then implement its understanding of appropriate member and officer roles in a strong organisation;
• There needed to be “clear messages – well communicated”;
• The authority should use LGA support as appropriate.

The report hailed Thanet’s junior and middle management staff, saying that the council had something “very special” in its committed workforce.

The review praised the council’s economic development strategy, which was seen as “clear and coherent”. Thanet, it said, also had a robust medium term strategy and could have confidence in the way its finances were managed. “You are aware of and are dealing appropriately with some significant financial risks, notwithstanding some public perceptions which view those risks in the context of the wider reputation of the council.”

The LGA report, though, rejected concern about whether councils could function effectively under ‘no overall control’. “They can and do in many parts of the country. You need to develop ways in which political leaders and political groups work together formally and informally. This does not imply that you will agree on everything but careful preparation, communication and consultation can often help to navigate through difficult decisions.”

It added: “Building trust and relationships is the key, and senior officers play a key role in this, supporting politicians so that their leadership and their administration can be effective.”

The review meanwhile suggested that there was some confusion about political roles and a lack of clarity about the boundaries between political and managerial responsibilities. “We endorse your commitment to undertake some development work on this,” it said.

Chief executive Sue McGonigal said: “The Peer Review was an important opportunity to gain a valuable external perspective on the council as a whole. The team visited on-site and interviewed a wide range of different stakeholders, Councillors and staff to gain a 360-degree view of the organisation.

“We’re putting together an action plan to take forward the LGA’s recommendations and are confident that this process will help us to make positive changes as part of our commitment to continuous improvement and to make the council a better organisation overall.”