Two Angus councillors censured after revealing how they would vote before planning appeal meeting

Two Angus councillors have been censured by the local government watchdog after revealing how they intended to vote before a planning appeal meeting.

At a hearing held in Forfar on September 30, the Standards Commission censured Councillors Iain Gall and Tommy Stewart for breaching the Councillors’ Code of Conduct.

According to the commission’s report, on August 21, 2024, the chairman of the Development Management Review Committee, David Cheape, emailed councillors the day before a crucial appeal against a previous planning decision, asking which way they were inclined to vote.

Mr Gall and Mr Stewart replied by email the same day, indicating that they were in favour of upholding the appeal.

Dr Lezley Stewart, Standards Commission chair of the hearing panel, said: “While the Panel accepted that neither Councillor Gall nor Councillor Stewart pre-judged the appeal, both expressed clearly and unequivocably their voting intentions before the meeting, in breach of the Code.”

The panel found that in their responses, both councillors used “definitive” wording, yet accepted that they had not “pre-judged” the matter ahead of the meeting.

Mr Cheape was found not to have breached the Code, but the panel noted that the email may have been “inadvisable”, as Mr Gall and Mr Stewart expressed their views only after being prompted.

The report stated: “The Panel accepted, as credible, the position of both Councillors Gall and Stewart that they had not closed their minds and could have changed their views at the meeting, had any significant new matter arisen.

“The Panel further accepted that both had sought to act with integrity and in good faith throughout the process.”

Taking all of the evidence into account, the panel decided to censure both councillors, which they said was the least severe sanction available to them.

Dr Stewart stated: “The Code is designed to give the public confidence that councillors will approach regulatory and quasi-judicial decisions, such as those made on planning applications and appeals, with an open mind and will consider all relevant information before reaching a conclusion.

“They also help ensure that committee members reach their own independent view on the merits of each matter.

“An important aspect of this, is for councillors not to express their voting inclinations in advance of any meeting, in which a quasi-judicial decision is to be made.”

Mr Stewart and Mr Gall have been contacted for comment.