Council Complaints Investigation Review Will Not Include Juneja Case

Published on: 10 Jul, 2015
Updated on: 10 Jul, 2015

Cllr Stephen Mansbridge and former councillor Monika Juneja (in 2013)

The review of Guildford Borough Council’s complaint investigation procedure will not include the independent investigation into the complaint against former councillor Monika Juneja, according to well placed sources at Guildford Borough Council (GBC).

The news came as a surprise to at least six of the councillors present, from across the political spectrum, that The Guildford Dragon NEWS has spoken to.

A question from Cllr Caroline Reeves (Lib Dem, Friary & St Nicolas) who leads the opposition prompted the apparent change of heart by council leader Stephen Mansbridge (Con, Ash South & Tongham). The questioned specifically referred to the reputational damage caused by the failure of the Juneja investigation, something the council has admitted.

The decision to concede any type of review of how complaints are handled is known to have caught many at the meeting by surprise. At one stage Satish Mistry, the council’s monitoring officer and head of legal and democratic services, unusually intervened in the debate to ask Cllr Mansbridge for some terms of reference.

Cllr Pauline Searle (Lib Dem, Stoughton) who asked what the review would cover during the council meeting  confirmed today (July 10) that she had been under the clear impression that it would include the Juneja investigation.

Cllr Susan Parker (GGG, Send) said: “I do not expect that anyone will consult GGG on the remit of that internal investigation. The Executive seems to have a habit of excluding GGG from discussion wherever possible.

“I note that Cllr Mansbridge has promised that in order to inspire confidence he will ask the monitoring officer (Satish Mistry) to ‘take this on’.  Cllr Mansbridge has promised that this will be public, open, transparent, and “will address all the issues.

“I think what is being proposed is a review of the historic investigation conducted into Monika Juneja by the monitoring officer Satish Mistry, at a time when the monitoring officer reported to the lead councillor for governance.

“I am sorry, but [this] does not inspire confidence in me. There seems to be no cultural change.  I expect that this will be yet another whitewash.”

Pressure to hold a review had culminated in a question from the leader of the opposition, Cllr Caroline Reeves (Lib Dem, Friary & St Nicolas), which was debated at Tuesday night’s full council meeting (July 7).

Cllr Mansbridge has been invited to comment by The Guildford Dragon NEWS, but has not responded.

In her written question Cllr Reeves had asked: “What actions will the leader of the council and his Conservative group take now and in the coming months to repair the damage to this council and to restore public confidence in the Local Plan process, following the conviction on criminal charges of the former lead councillor for planning who led the Local Plan process in the last council term?”

In his response Cllr Mansbridge wrote: “It is important to separate the Local Plan process from the largely historic issues associated with the individual concerned [Juneja], as one did not impinge on the other directly.

“…The Conservative group was returned with an increased majority [in the May GBC election] which demonstrates that there is a level of confidence that has increased and not decreased, and that we are on a positive track.

“… Reputations are not rebuilt with words but with actions and positive outcomes, and that is what this administration has already delivered and will continue to delivered and will continue to deliver vigorously.”

In her supplementary question Cllr Reeves asked: “Maybe this is the right time to review our actions concerning formal investigations. The perception of a minority of our residents is that we, as a whole council, are in disrepute despite the fact that our work covers a far wider sphere than the local plan and in some areas is far more critical and immediate to individuals…

“A review of our investigation procedure would reassure those doubters of us so that we can move forward from this situation.”

Cllr Mansbridge responded: “I think this matter was considered very fully at the audit and corporate governance committee and then subsequently, as part of the review of governance.

“I have no objection to having a review into our investigative procedures but I would say that having been aware of what was happening throughout and when you look back at something through hindsight it is obviously a great deal easier than when you are actually following something through.

“But I am very clear, in support of the monitoring officer, that he was at absolute pains to go through every single procedure and to take all the right advice at the different points as this investigation went through.

“The fact that certain things transpired in particular ways was I don’t believe the fault of the investigation, I think that was done perfectly properly. But in order to inspire confidence in the public, as a further action, then I think that this is a reasonable request and I am happy to ask the monitoring officer to take that on.”

Cllr Parker said that she was glad that her original request for a governance review was being followed up and was grateful to Cllr Reeves for asking the question. (Cllr Reeves later in the debate pointed out that her question had not sought a governance review but a review of the investigations procedures).

Cllr Pauline Searle asked what the review would cover. She said: “I fear this is going to rumble on, and on, and on unless everything is transparent and clear. So is this review going to bring forward answers to peoples questions and is it going to be transparent and open to the public?”

Mr Mistry then unusually interjected to add a request that Cllr Mansbridge, in answering Cllr Searle, was very clear about the terms of reference of the review.

In his response, Cllr Mansbridge said: “I talked very specifically about a review of our investigative procedure and that review, to answer Cllr Searle’s question very clearly, will be absolutely open and fully transparent to the public and will aim to address all the issues that have been brought up to date.”

He continued to criticise Cllr Parker for bringing the issue of the Local Plan Panel selection into the debate.

Council officers are understood to be working further on the precise terms of reference for the review which is expected to be conducted by an outside party.

The reported debate can be seen on the GBC website. Click here to view. The agenda item in question commences just after 48 minutes into the meeting.

Share This Post