Harrow councillor Stephen Wright was found to have breached multiple code of conduct as the council’s Standards Group has unanimously concluded and the notice is attached. However the sanction applied to him was minimised and has taken no consideration to the trauma the complainant had suffered in her vulnerability, and subsequently the harm brought to her children through a family court case. The complaint was made in July 2018 but was only dealt with in 2019. The complaint was about councillor Stephen Wright abused his power and groped the woman and pursued sexual prey on her when she was ill and in devastation after Harrow Council removed her children from her care. But the sanctions notice worded it as ‘some inappropriate physical contact’ to minimise the criminal offence. Councillor Stephen Wright should be removed from office and made known to the public as a sex predator who has abused his power, but the current sanction is like a mere slap on the wrist, the victim didn’t even get an apology. Such distortion in wording the complaint and light-weight sanction is unjust to the victim, compared to the gross misconduct will potentially encourages similar behaviour as councillor Stephen Wright has well demonstrated. Harrow Council must apologise to the victim. Councillor Stephen Wright must be further investigated for other similar behaviour over the many years of being a councillor in Pinner and police must investigate this criminal offence. And it is unfair to the general public who still has to pay for his councillor’s allowance at near £900 a month, whilst our GP’s local walk-in centre is facing closure as a result of fund cutting.

Harrow council sent the decision notice to the victim in an email as below, without proper letter heading or signature and so far other councillors have not been informed, nor has it been published on the local newspaper as the sanctions determined. It refused to send a copy of the independent investigator’s report to the victim. It also refused to name councilor Stephen Wright by his full name. It doesn’t want to explain why the delay of a year in investigation and it is not clear who made the decisions so far, as all communication came from only one person, Jessica Farmer the head of legal department, who has declined to make amendments, or give any clear explanation. After many enquires she claimed the decisions were made by Hugh Peart, the Standards Officer of Harrow Council.

3 weeks after the notice was sent to the victim, Harrow Council finally put it on its website:

http://www.harrow.gov.uk/info/200143/public_notices/2343/code_of_conduct_for_councillors_and_members

And finally the newspaper reported it on July 12, 2019, with councillor Stephen Wright’s full name, however his response was in denial of his sexual prey, which was the victim’s main complaint. He said he ‘helped her too much’. We ask councillor Wright to explain what sort of ‘help’ requires persistent groping:

https://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/news/17764753.harrow-councillor-censured-inappropriate-behaviour/​

https://www.mynewsmag.co.uk/pinner-councillor-accepts-code-of-conduct-breach/

Harrow Council Code of Conduct for Councillors and Members Standards Group Notice 21st June 2019

On 7th June 2019 Harrow Council’s Standards Working Group considered complaints from a female resident that Councillor Stephen Wright had breached the Code of Conduct for Councillors and Members. She alleged that he used information to exaggerate his influence as a powerful decision maker to form an inappropriate personal relationship with her. The Working Group heard from the complainant, the investigating officer, witnesses and the councillor and unanimously concluded that Councillor Wright had breached that Code. The Working Group is made up of a Labour Councillor, a Conservative Councillor and an Independent Person.

It found that Councillor Stephen Wright failed to treat others with respect; compromised the impartiality of those working for the Council; brought his office and the Council into disrepute; used his position improperly to secure an advantage; breached the Protocols on Members’ Access to Information and on Councillor/Officer Relations; and inappropriately involved himself in the day to day management of Council services by:

* Making some inappropriate physical contact with the complainant
* Seeking a frequency of contact with her that was not justified in the circumstances
* Exceeding the normal professional boundaries of a councillor-resident relationship in the frequency and timing of his contact with her and the suggested locations of meetings
* Describing council officers as liars trying to whitewash events, and exceeding his role by attempting to secure the suspension or dismissal of an officer
* Exceeding his role as ‘emotional support’ by suggesting to the complainant ways to undermine the council’s case in litigation, and drafting documents on her behalf * * Attempting to secure privileged meetings between the complainant and senior officers
* Retaining confidential papers on his personal device when asked not to by the court
* Misrepresenting and/or misunderstanding his role as a councillor in relation to family proceedings and
* Inappropriately demanding an independent investigation.

In view of the above breaches the Working Group unanimously recommended to the Monitoring Officer that Councillor Wright be censured and offered training on the representational role of councillors so that the boundaries in carrying out this role can be clearly understood and respected in future. The Working Group also recommended that this notice be read out at Council, and put on the council’s website and in a local newspaper.

Reasoning of the decision maker:

The Monitoring Officer noted the extensive investigation, the evidence and representations, and the unanimous findings of the Working Group and decided to accept both those findings and the recommended sanctions.

Sanction applied:

* Censure
* Notice to be read out at Council 
* Notice in the newspaper
* Notice on the website
* Training

The original words from the victim’s complaint:

“My complaints are councillor Wright sexually preyed on me during the time of May - June 2018 when I was ill and my children were taken into care by Harrow Social Service, colluding with Head Of People’s Service Paul Hewitt and aided by his colleagues Norman Stevenson and Paul Osborne who refused to help me and pushed me into the grasp of councillor Wright. Then after I rejected his insertion into my meeting with MP Nick Hurd and reported him to the police he tried to sabotage my children’s case and made denigrating phone calls around. His action, together with Paul Hewitt’s conniving at social service’s deliberate misconduct resulted in my children being unjustly removed from my care and remained in a foreign country, subject to foster care even after all the facts and independent experts reports and recommendations were univocal towards the children should be returned to my care with support package from LA. The separation was 7 months long and in December 2018 hearing the judge ordered the children return to my care after 5 days cross examination of witnesses and social workers. It was revealed in that hearing that from onset LA plotted to remove my children permanently against all government guidances and expert reports. LA used false information and committed perjury.”

An appeal has been sent to Harrow Council Standards Officer Hugh Peart and the Cabinet members lead by councillor Graham Henson. The victim has not got a reply.