A Sunday Mail investigation has found that councillors are routinely removed from their jobs by a “kangaroo court” for highlighting cuts, institutional failings and alleged corruption. Elected local representatives have said a controversial Holyrood-funded ethics watchdog is being used as a tool to suppress legitimate dissent.
They rounded on the Standards Commission for Scotland (SCS) as a “jumped-up HR department” for repeatedly hauling them in front of tribunals and sanctioning them. The Sunday Mail can reveal a 44 per cent rise in cases referred to the SCS last year.
Punishments and examples
Punishments can include lengthy suspensions from duties – sometimes without pay – with few able to bear appeal costs. Examples include a councillor in Dumfries and Galloway hit with a three-month “rolling suspension” – lasting nearly a year – after questioning staff hiring; a former depute lord provost in Bute suspended for a month for criticising local flowerbeds; an Aberdeen councillor interrupted 14 times and blocked from calling witnesses in her hearing, then hit with a four-month ban; and a North Lanarkshire councillor repeatedly hauled before the watchdog for criticism of council, including on golden goodbye payouts and a multi-billion pound contract award.
A landmark judicial review brought by Glasgow councillor Fiona Higgins was heard this month in the Court of Session. Lord Sandison heard claims from Higgins’ lawyers that she is being prevented from using “smoking gun” evidence in her upcoming SCS hearing, making the process unfair. Higgins, who is accused of “disrespecting” ex-Glasgow finance chief Martin Booth by claiming he “cynically and wilfully misled” the public on local teacher cuts in 2024, is just one of many councillors at the sharp end of standards complaints.
Weaponised courtesy clauses
Local politicians say clauses in codes of conduct increasingly demanding “courtesy” and “respect” to top officials are being “weaponised” to clamp down on legitimate criticism. In Dumfries and Galloway, independents Ian Carruthers and Andrew Wood have faced complaints by chief exec Dawn Roberts. Carruthers has yet to face a hearing – yet was still slapped with a “rolling” three-month ban over claims he interfered in operational matters. He said he is still keen to get to his hearing to “expose” what he believes has gone on, despite warnings from other councillors that the SCS is “a kangaroo court”.
Wood, who faces a hearing next month for criticising the council CEO in a row over bus services, said he believes the outcome in his case has been “pre-determined”. Wood, a councillor for 14 years, said: “Our lead governance officer is supporting the chief exec, which means I have no legal support within the council. She’s on over £200,000 a year, I’m not, I’m on £24,000 a year. That’s just wrong.” Dumfries and Galloway Council said it’s “not at liberty to comment”.
Appeals and costs
Councillor Jennifer Stewart from Aberdeen, who was hauled before the SCS and suspended for four months after claiming the lord provost was “sexist”, was also critical of the process. The Sunday Mail previously reported how her sheriff court appeal is paused pending the outcome of Higgins’ case. Stewart, a former Lib Dem-turned-independent, said: “We’d a lot of evidence and witnesses and they denied me everything.”
In another case, Aberdeen’s Labour group leader Tauqeer Malik did overturn a ruling at appeal to the sheriff, after accusing another councillor of “prejudice”. But he warned: “Many found guilty don’t appeal because of cost.” North Lanarkshire councillor Greg Lennon was hit with a two-month suspension in 2024 over online posts. Lennon has also faced complaints from council bosses for challenging a £1.8billion public contract for repairs and maintenance firm Mears. He compiled a report for MSPs raising “serious and systemic concerns about the governance, operations, and unchecked authority” of the watchdog. He said: “There has to be a root-and-branch review. It’s like a banana republic.”
Ethical Standards Commissioner Ian Bruce, who boasts a salary of more than £105,000, is tasked with reviewing complaints before deciding whether to refer them to the SCS. Last year, parliamentary papers revealed the SCS went to Holyrood requesting extra funding due to “a 44 per cent increase in the number of cases referred to it by the Ethical Standards Commissioner” and a corresponding rise in hearings. Both bodies combined receive more than £2million a year.
Suzanna Vestri, convener of the SCS, said: “The Standards Commission does not seek to stifle the ability of elected councillors to represent their constituents, or to scrutinise the work of their local authority.”
