Mr Clark, chairman of the Economic Development Committee, a role he won in an election against Mr Snowdon, made the complaint against his fellow politician, which included allegations of disclosing confidential information; improperly interfering with the work of the committee; the use of disrespectful language in communications; and a general complaint that his actions and communications with other members fell outside the code of conduct.
He claimed that Mr Snowdon was trying to undermine the work of the committee and him personally and was insinuating impropriety in meetings with external parties over the data centre concept.
Fellow members of the committee said that they found the behaviours and relationship within the committee to be uncomfortable.
Melissa McCullough, the island’s commissioner for standards, dismissed all claims except that Mr Snowdon’s conduct fell below the overarching principles of political life. She has required him to apologise in writing to Mr Clark.
However she defended any politician’s right to continue to ask questions.
‘This case illustrates the importance of maintaining the distinction between robust scrutiny, which is essential to democratic governance, and conduct which, through tone, repetition, and presentation, risks undermining trust between members and confidence in public institutions,’ she said.
‘Nothing in this decision should be taken as limiting the right of members to oppose projects, raise concerns about governance, or criticise the actions of committees.
‘However, the exercise of these rights carries corresponding responsibilities. Elected members are expected to express their views honestly, responsibly, and in a manner consistent with the standards of conduct required of those holding public office.’
She said that Mr Snowdon had been given opportunities to seek clarification and was given explanations about issues he had concerns about, but allegations and insinuations continued to be circulated.
‘In these circumstances, the conduct cannot properly be characterised as legitimate political scrutiny alone, but instead crossed the boundary into behaviour which was personally undermining and fell below the standard required by the code.
‘The effective functioning of the States depends on members being able to conduct that debate in a manner that maintains mutual respect and public confidence in the institution.
‘While members may hold very different views about the merits of potential projects, they share a common responsibility to act in the public interest and to work together in a manner that enables the States to function effectively.
‘The public rightly expects disagreement in politics, but it also expects that those disagreements are conducted with integrity, accountability, objectivity, respect, and a shared commitment to the wellbeing of the community.’
Alderney’s States meet today to discuss plans for significant government reform, which Mr Snowdon has said he will be voting against.
The States is also pressing forward with the data centre project, and Mr Snowdon said this week he continued to oppose it.
You need to be logged in to comment.