Staffordshire County Council has brought in external investigators after complaints against elected members rocketed from 12 to 168 in the space of a year.
The overwhelming majority of complaints were linked to councillors’ use of social media, while almost 86 per cent were made against Reform UK members, according to a report presented to the council’s Audit and Standards Committee.
Between 2 May 2025 and 30 April 2026, the council received 168 complaints about elected members, compared with just 12 during the previous 12 months.
Of those complaints, 144 were made against Reform UK councillors, representing 85.7 per cent of the total. Nineteen complaints related to Conservative members, while five concerned independent councillors or members of other political groups.
Most complaints, 138 in total, were made by members of the public. A further 24 came from fellow councillors, three from parish councillors and one from an MP.
Comments made on social media accounted for 135 complaints. Other complaints related to remarks made during council meetings, motions brought before the council, councillors failing to discharge their duties correctly, alleged bullying, attire worn in meetings, use of political material, media interviews and general behaviour.
There are currently 88 complaints still being investigated.
Of the 80 cases that have been concluded, 14 were found to have breached the Members’ Code of Conduct, while 66 resulted in no breach being found. The report did not identify the councillors involved.
The report stated:
“Between 2nd May 2025 and 30th April 2026, 168 complaints were received against elected members of Staffordshire County Council. This represents a significant increase compared with the same period in 2024/25, when 12 complaints were received.
“It is worth highlighting that of the 168 complaints received, 83 related to alleged thematic conduct of a small number of members. 134 of the complaints related to comments made on social media channels, either by elected members or conversations that have taken place between elected members and constituents.
“Elected members should be mindful of their use of social media, as online comments and interactions are public, permanent, and easily shared beyond their intended audience.
“As visible elected representatives, councillors may be perceived as speaking in an official capacity even when using personal accounts, and posts may therefore attract scrutiny.
“Inappropriate, misleading, dismissive, or poorly judged content can give rise to complaints, including alleged breaches of the Members’ Code of Conduct, and may create impressions of bias, disrespect, or a lack of professionalism. Such behaviour has the potential to undermine public trust and confidence in both the individual councillor and the council as a whole.”
Monitoring officer Kate Loader told Tuesday’s meeting
“It is important to emphasise that the existence of a complaint does not necessarily mean that there has been a breach of the code.
“Each complaint is preliminarily assessed on its own merits and consideration is given to whether there is any evidence of a potential breach and, if so, what action, if any, is proportionate in the circumstances.
“The arrangements previously approved by this committee continue to work well, despite the increase in the volume of complaints that have caused delays within the process.
“Independent persons have been involved throughout the process as required, and where action has been appropriate, there have been mechanisms available to secure resolution, whether through advice, training, apology or, in more serious cases, referral through the committee’s standards procedures.
“The report and the data available to the committee to date provide assurance that standards of conduct amongst the majority of county councillors remains high. The majority of members continue to conduct themselves appropriately and in accordance with the principles that underpin public service.
“We are working to address the backlog. And it is notable now there has been a gradual reduction in the amount of complaints being received.”
Committee member David Webster asked whether there were enough resources to investigate the volume of complaints.
Ms Loader said administrative changes had helped streamline the process but confirmed external investigators had been brought in to cope with demand.
She said
“We have needed to bring in additional resource in the form of external investigators.
“Apart from that, with the assistance of an extremely solid team, we have managed to resolve complaints within the existing resource apart from the use of additional investigators.
“That has however resulted in a delay within the process.
“If that delay continues or if the numbers peak again then that is something we may need to review from a resourcing point of view. But at the moment, I am hopeful we can bring the reporting mechanisms back within the ideal timescale for a preliminary assessment, which is 28 days.”
Councillor Craig Humphreyson said
“I will be interested to see updates when the 88 are done. It seems to me, with only 14 (in breach and) with 66 no breach, these complaints (don’t have) any merit or substance to them if the vast majority are being disregarded and there’s nothing wrong.”
Among the 14 cases where breaches were found, most involved comments made on Facebook. Sanctions included removing posts, publishing clarifications, issuing apologies and undertaking additional Code of Conduct training.
Two of the most serious cases were referred to the Standards Panel, which recommended that the councillors’ group leaders consider removing the whip and removing them from committees and outside bodies.
