Complaints Against Guildford Greenbelt Group Councillor To Be Heard in Public

Published on: 5 Sep, 2017
Updated on: 5 Sep, 2017

Cllr David Reeve

Two complaints against a Guildford Greenbelt Group (GGG) borough councillor, brought by the council leader and the leader of the opposition at Guildford Borough Council, are to be heard at a public meeting on Monday (September 11).

The complaints, made individually by Cllr Paul Spooner (Con, Ash South & Tongham) and Cllr Caroline Reeves (Lib Dem, Friary & St Nicolas) are being dealt with as one case. They concern the release of a report, in July 2016, on the required housing number for the Borough of Guildford, a crucial component of the draft Local Plan.

It is alleged that the report, written by the Cllr David Reeve (GGG, Clandon & Horsley), is based on information provided to him on a confidential basis.

Cllrs Paul Spooner & Caroline Reeves

An independent investigation into the complaints concluded that Cllr Reeve had breached the GBC councillors’ Code of Conduct through:

a failure to treat others with respect;
the disclosure of confidential information;
conducting himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing the office of a councillor or the council into disrepute.

It appears that, as Cllr Reeve refused to accept the findings and recommendations of the independent investigation, the matter has been referred to a “Hearings Sub-Committee” composed of five councillors, four Conservative and one Liberal Democrat, in line with prescribed council arrangements.

The sub-committee who will hear the complaints (from left to right): Cllr Richard Billington (Con, Tillingbourne, Colin Cross, (Lib Dem, Lovelace) Gordon Jackson (Con, Pirbright), Nigel Kearse, ( Con Ash South & Tongham), Nigel Manning (Con, Ash Vale)

The public hearing will be heard in the council chamber at Millmead at 10 am on Monday, September 11 (2017).

Responses to Complaints Against Guildford Greenbelt Group Councillor To Be Heard in Public

Jules Cranwell Reply

September 6, 2017 at 4:40 pm

This is disgusting and unfair treatment of a decent and hardworking councillor but typical of the way Cllr Spooner and his colleagues treat GGG councillors. Just look at the abuse Susan Parker has been subjected to in public meetings.

The real issue here is that Cllr Reeve has had the temerity to try to make senses of the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA). He has had to work out the figures for himself, taking a herculean effort, precisely because the council has refused to divulge the secret calculations used to arrive at the SHMA figures.

I do not expect justice to be served by a predominantly Tory sub-committee, as they will never go against the wishes of their boss.

It seems the Tories at GBC will do anything to silence independent voices.

David Reeve is nothing less than a hero for standing up to this crowd.
Sue Fox Reply

September 7, 2017 at 2:36 pm

I agree with Jules Cranwell, this looks like a kangaroo court. If they must, the group should at least contain a representative of all parties with an independent chair.

There is an independent amongst the aldermen.
Valerie Thompson Reply

September 7, 2017 at 9:01 pm

The whole affair is a disgrace.

GBC has failed, utterly in its pledge to be “open and transparent” about its business. They have failed to answer requests under the Freedom of Information Act, regarding the SHMA numbers. They have failed to follow the rules in respect of allowing the sub-sub-contracting of the research on housing numbers, and failed to ensure that this information was made public.

Cllr Reeve has struggled to discover the hidden facts, which many people believe were excessively exaggerated, with the possible result of the loss of green belt around most of Guildford’s villages.

GBC have not listened to the public outcry against this. Indeed, the numbers of proposed houses in the 2017 Plan is higher than was proposed in the previous Local Plan.

It is typical of Cllr Spooner and his coterie to blame someone else for their own failings.
Lisa Wright Reply

September 7, 2017 at 11:33 pm

Reading the appendices, it seems the council were just upset that Cllr Reeve released his report during the Local Plan consultation. Would they be just as upset if his report was delayed and could be buried at a different time?

I particularly like the statement made by Laura Howard, planning officer at GBC who said “..has already made a difficult PR situation even more difficult”

I believe, as many others do, that this Local Plan is supposed to be a very logical, law abiding and statistically accurate document, providing the future for not just our children but the many generations that will follow us in the future.

I am offended that GBC thinks David Reeve qualified analysis of the SHMA is just a PR consideration and not, as should be the case, cause for a further, detailed questioning of the data and further assessment of the SHMA figures provided by their highly paid consultants.

How many more times do we have to go through these repeated attempts to ignore the people of Guildford? Why does GBC refuse to release the SHMA calculations? Obviously the figures are very questionable. If it was a genuine, robust document, it would stand up to any scrutiny.

How long can GBC hide? Do they assume the planning inspector will just wave through a document, or our Local Plan without the necessary scrutiny or have they been given the thumbs up by someone higher up the chain already?
Ben Paton Reply

September 8, 2017 at 8:46 am

Who is Laura Howard? What right has an unelected civil servant to criticise an elected councillor for doing his job on that basis that he’s, “…made a difficult PR situation even more difficult”.

God’s Truth! Is that all Ms Howard cares about? Making the PR situation easier?

Is that what planning at Guildford Borough Council is all about – “Public Relations”?

Do they hire a PR agency to promote their propaganda? Bell Pottinger is probably a bit short of work right now. Perhaps Ms Howard should give them a call.
- Harry Eve Reply
  
  September 8, 2017 at 3:11 pm
  
  When you take away the PR element, all that is left supporting the current draft local plan is unsound evidence.
Adam Aaronson Reply

September 8, 2017 at 8:46 pm

Sue Fox makes a fair point in saying: “the group should at least contain a representative of all parties with an independent chair”.

According to the documentation in this link http://www2.guildford.gov.uk/councilmeetings/documents/g705/Public%20reports%20pack%2011th-Sep-2017%2010.00%20Hearings%20Sub-Committee.pdf?T=10

it seems that “Under Article 10 of the Council’s Constitution, the Hearings Sub-Committee shall be politically balanced”

Many people might think that this means that the members of the sub-committee should be drawn from all the four parties represented on GBC, yet the members of the sub-committee seem to come from only two parties. Four members are from the Conservatives and one from the LIb Dems.

Perhaps someone from GBC could explain why there are no Labour or Guildford Greenbelt Group councillors on the sub-committee and how this can represent political balance.
Colin Bell Reply

September 9, 2017 at 2:43 pm

The whole purpose of having councillors is for them to scrutinise the leaders who produce “facts” on which major decisions are made. The public has a right to know when they are being fed unsubstantiated and inaccurate facts.

Sadly too many natural Conservative voters simply vote without even knowing that they are electing these sort of people into positions of great power.
A Atkinson Reply

September 9, 2017 at 5:35 pm

Well, what they mean by “balance” actually means representing the make up of the % seats in the chamber.
Jenny Procter Reply

September 11, 2017 at 7:20 am

David Roberts erudite and very clear analysis of this case puts it very clearly in perspective. Excellent!
Adam Aaronson Reply

September 11, 2017 at 1:03 pm

It emerged within the first two hours of this hearing this morning that GBC needed to get QC’s advice as to whether the hearing breaches Cllr Reeve’s human rights.

Says it all, really.