To consider the exclusion of the press and public from all or part this meeting while the following item is being considered on the grounds that it will involve the disclosure of “exempt” information as defined in schedule 12 A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) and whether the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
Minutes:
1. The Chair asked Councillor Watkins whether she wished to ask the Committee to exclude the press and public from all or part of the hearing and whether she considered that any of the agenda papers should be kept confidential at this stage.
The Ombudsman’s representatives had already indicated in advance of the hearing that they saw no reason for the hearing to be conducted in private or for the papers to be kept confidential. Councillor Watkins confirmed that she did not wish to exclude the press and public as she had nothing to hide and she had no objection to the investigation report and background papers being made public. Therefore, the hearing was conducted in public in accordance with the Council’s remote meetings Protocol, save for those parts of the hearing where the Standards Committee retired in private to deliberate. The public parts of the meeting were recorded and uploaded onto the Council’s website for public viewing. The Ombudsman’s investigation report and the other background papers previously circulated with the meeting agenda as Part 2 documents were also made available on the Council website for public inspection.
2. The Chair confirmed that everyone had received a copy of the hearings procedure and understood the process that the Committee would follow in determining the matter.
Stage 2 – Findings of Fact
3. The Chair asked Councillor Watkins to confirm whether there were any disputed facts, as identified in the Investigating Officer’s report. The investigation report identified two potential areas of disputed fact:-
“Was Councillor Watkins acting “in the moment” when contacting the
Practice via telephone and making her complaint to the Health Board?
Did Councillor Watkins exaggerate the behaviour of the Practice’s staff when making her complaint to the Health Board?”
4. The Chair advised Councillor Watkins that the Committee had taken the preliminary view that these were not disputed facts, as such, as there did not appear to be any issue regarding what events took place and what was said. These were matters of record, as a full transcript of the telephone conversations was included at Appendix 12 to the investigation report and her written complaints to the Health Board were also well documented. The identified matters of dispute appeared to relate to her state of mind and intention which, in turn were more relevant to whether she had breached the Code of Conduct and, if so, the seriousness if such a breach.
5. The Chair explained to Councillor Watkins that she would still have the opportunity to make representations regarding these matters at subsequent stages of the hearing. On that basis, Councillor Watkins confirmed that the facts, as set out in the Investigating Officer’s report were all agreed.
6. Therefore, the Committee proceeded to Stage 3 of the hearing, on the basis of the following undisputed facts:-
(a) Councillor Watkins made 2 telephone calls to the Practice on 7th August 2020 to discuss the care and treatment of a patient;
(b) Councillor Watkins was acting in her capacity as a member of the Council and as a Council-appointed representative to the Health Board when advocating on behalf of the patient;
(c) Councillor Watkins was attempting to assist an elderly patient;
(d) The Care Navigator, Mrs Simmons, found Councillor Watkins to be very demanding during the first call. Mrs Simmons dealt with the patient directly.
(e) The Care Navigator, Ms Dowsell, found Councillor Watkins to be threatening during the second call and felt that Councillor Watkins was attempting to use her position as a member of the Health Board improperly and threateningly.
(f) The Practice Staff were acting in accordance with the Practice’s data protection policies.
(g) Councillor Watkins made two complaints to the Health Board’s Primary Care Unit, on 20th August and 15th September 2020. The Health Board did not uphold either of Councillor Watkins’ complaints.
(h) Councillor Watkins had historical issues with the Practice relating to her own healthcare.