Liverpool Shenanigans: Charge Two and Counting

2) Councillors Bradley and Storey met privately with a former employee of the City Council, Mr Forde, who was, at that time, pursuing a claim for constructive dismissal against the city council. This was most irregular and quite improper.
Mr Forde alleges that at this meeting, Cllr Bradley, with Councillor Storey’s compliance, sought information regarding Mr Harborow in relation to the Culture Company. Councillor Bradley is conspiring to undermine Mr Harborow by seeking information which would damage him. At this time, the Leader of the Council had promised an independent internal enquiry into the cause of the Mathew Street cancellation. If there was no improper motive for this meeting, it is unclear why Mr Forde was not simply instructed to provide any information directly to the internal audit enquiry conducting the investigation. No doubt you will speak to Mr Forde direct and hear about the contents of the meeting and at whose instigation it occurred (see below).

i) Councillor Bradley is in breach of Clause 3 (1) of the Code in that he failed to treat Mr Forde with respect. Two days before this extraordinary meeting, Councillor Bradley had publicly endorsed a council report which critiscised (unfairly in my view) Mr Forde’s conduct. It was disrespectful to Mr Forde for Councillor Bradley to seek such a meeting, unless for the purposes of offering an apology, explanation or retraction. He made no such offer, according to Mr Forde.
ii) Councillor Bradley is in breach of Clause 5 of the Code in that, as Leader of the city council, he conducted himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing his office or authority into disrepute by initiating a secret meeting with Mr Forde, who was pursuing legal action against the city council.
iii) Councillor Storey is in Breach of Clause 5 of the Code in that, as an Executive Member of the city council, he conducted himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing his office or authority into disrepute by being present throughout a secret meeting with Mr Forde, who was pursuing legal action against the city council.
At no time did Councillor Storey absent himself from this lengthy meeting or voice any objections to the way proceedings were being conducted by Councillor Bradley.
The Board may consider this specific breach to be amongst the most serious since Councillor Storey has previously been found guilty by the Standards Board of bringing his office into disrepute. The investigating officer may therefore consider it helpful and relevant for the hearing to consider relevant papers from Councillor Storey’s earlier breach of the Code. The action taken by the Standards Board then had clearly failed to encourage better standards of behaviour by Councillor Storey. He has a previous record for this behaviour - and does not appear either to have learnt his lesson, or reformed.
iv) Councillor Bradley is in Breach of Clause 5 of the Code in that he asked Mr Forde for information about Mr Harborow which he could use against the chief executive of the Culture Company. Councillor Bradley conducted himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing his office or authority into disrepute.
v) Councillor Storey is in breach of Clause 5 of the Code in that, although Mr Forde provides no evidence that Councillor Storey directly asked for information about Mr Harborow, he was nevertheless, party to an attempted conspiracy to undermine Mr Harborow and remove him from office.
Councillor Storey subsequently failed to notify any officer of the council about the secret meeting with Mr Forde, or the terms of the discussion which took place.