Welsh Reform Councillor censured for sending an ‘intimidating’ email to a member of council staff

Anthony Lewis, Local democracy reporter

A councillor in Merthyr Tydfil has been censured for sending an “intimidating” email to a member of council staff and making a complaint against them with no merit.

A standards committee hearing of the council found that Reform UK Councillor Andrew Barry had breached the code of conduct following a referral from the ombudsman, and decided to censure him.

The breaches related to parts of the code of the conduct which relate to respect and consideration for others, not using bullying behaviour or harassing any person and not making vexatious, malicious or frivolous complaints against other members or anyone who works for, or on behalf of, the authority.

In her report, the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales Michelle Morris found that an email sent by Councillor Andrew Barry to a council employee was “disproportionate and intemperate and its tone intimidating in nature” and that the councillor had “failed to recognise that his communication may not have been in keeping with the standards of behaviour expected of local councillors” and that he failed to recognise that his behaviour had caused genuine upset to others.”

She also found that the councillor’s subsequent complaint of gross misconduct about the council employee had no merit and that it appeared to have been made in retaliation for the concerns which had been brought to the ombudsman about his behaviour.

And she found that this sequence of behaviour was suggestive of a breach of the duty councillors have to treat others with respect and consideration, to not bully or harass others, and to not bring vexatious complaints against others.

The standards committee report said that Cllr Barry had confirmed that he disagreed with the finding that he had breached the members’ code of conduct and would be making a representation that the referral made to the ombudsman had been “politically motivated.”

It was alleged that Cllr Barry had sent an email which was “disrespectful and bullying” in nature to an employee of the council and that the member would not discuss the behaviour of concern with council staff.

It was also alleged that Cllr Barry went on to “victimise” the employee by lodging a complaint of gross misconduct against them, and it was alleged that this was in retaliation for concerns being lodged with the ombudsman.

Counsel Phillip Morris representing the ombudsman’s office told committee said this case related to an email sent by Cllr Barry in November 2024 to a council officer in which he asked for schedules to include headings of authority sanctioned posts for all of the authority’s social media channel outputs over the past two months between September 1 and October 31, 2024, along with the same data for the same period the previous year.

He also wanted the number of “deleted comments” from all social media channels for the same time periods.

The officer asked why the councillor required the information, explaining that the team did not currently have the resource to look at his request and said that as the information was in the public domain, the councillor could collate this information himself

In response he said: “When I receive the information, it is for me to decide what is done with it not for you to question why I require it.

“Please don’t tell me I need to place an FOI [Freedom of Information request] within my own authority because that sort of president [sic] will have some serious consequences.

“In terms of resources within your department, am I really to understand your [sic] saying do it yourself?

“You have indicated some serious issues here around support to elected members, withholding information and as for doing it myself, how am I to know what you have deleted.

“This is beginning to look like a two tier system of support between Labour and the Independents, I will take advice.”

The matter was then referred to the ombudsman by another officer and in February 2025, Cllr Barry said he was filing a complaint of gross misconduct against the officer he had emailed.

Mr Morris said it appeared to be that the nature of the complaint of gross misconduct was solely the response to his initial email and his dissatisfaction with the reply and there was very little beyond that of substance to the complaint.

He said the complaint was considered and investigated but it was not upheld and Mr Morris said that the complaint had only been made by Cllr Barry after he’d been informed that the ombudsman was investigating the earlier issue with the email so it to be a reaction or retaliation to that.

In his response to the ombudsman, Cllr Barry said he had never had a cross word with the officer and that his initial request was legitimate and innocent as shown by the fact that the information he requested was subsequently provided to him and he felt this highlighted the continual suspicion, as a councillor, he was unfairly treated with.

He said his reference to “serious consequences” referred to the council’s democratic mandate responsibilities.

He said his gross misconduct complaint was brought about by the “lack of governance procedures and protocols” at the council and he said there was no guidance for councillors about how to complain about officers and said: “Yet as a result of the lack of governance procedures, I am being sanctioned?”

He said no procedure to complain existed, only an invite to attend a meeting where he was “clearly not welcomed.”

He said he was not saying “sack her straight away” but he was asking was it gross misconduct and saying have a look at the procedures and see if she has done anything wrong.

The council did not consider that the officer had done anything wrong and he disagreed with that.

Cllr Barry mentioned a “toxic environment” at the council which led to his reticence about attending a meeting about the incident in the council’s building.

He said he was not made to feel welcomed, he was “treated with suspicion, contempt and open threats are made to councillors by staff.”

The report said that believed the alleged poor treatment of Independent councillors by council staff was a result of an internal audit he had arranged to investigate alleged unauthorised payments, at the end of 2024.

Mr Morris said that Cllr Barry did not regard himself as a bully, he didn’t think it added up and he didn’t believe the officer had been affected by this and questioned why they had not made a referral to the ombudsman themselves if they felt bullied but suggested a referral had been made because of allegations that he’d been making and that this complaint was a “distraction” from all of that.

Cllr Barry said it was difficult to express how “obstructive” the council is towards the Independent group referring to a change of seating arrangements which had been requested 13 months previously but only happened after Labour took control of the council.

He said he did not think he had done anything wrong and said he was a straight talker and always had been and was entitled to ask for and be given information.

Mr Morris said that Cllr Barry was dissatisfied with being told he could obtain the information himself and Cllr Barry said it was not for the officer to question this because he was the duly elected member to represent the public and the officer was there to provide the information.

Cllr Barry said it was a “witch hunt” against him by senior officers, that he would not be standing for re-election and he may make the decision to stand down more immediately.

Cllr Barry was first elected as a councillor in 2004 and he represents the Town ward.

He served as a cabinet member in the former Independent administration but joined Reform UK last year.