Wellington Deputy Mayor found in breach of code of conduct

Wellington Deputy Mayor got in a Twitter exchange and referred to another user as a “nonce”. The person complained to WCC that this was a breach of the code of conduct, as nonce is a term used to call someone a paedophile.

Mayor Andrew Little has upheld the complaint saying:

Mayor Little has determined that there has been a breach of the Code of Conduct, and has determined the appropriate actions to remedy this breach are:

• Deputy Mayor McNulty must make a post on X explaining that he did not understand the offensiveness of the term used, which was part of the clarification made by Deputy Mayor McNulty in his response.
• Make a direct apology to you, acknowledging the use of the term “nonce” was inappropriate.

The full finding by the Mayor about the Deputy Mayor is:

The Council Code of Conduct includes as a general principle that “Elected members should remember the respect and dignity of their office in their dealings with … the public”. The Code of Conduct under the heading “Relationships with the community” also refers to individual citizens being “accorded respect”.

I have assessed the complaint on the basis that the term “nonce” means “paedophile” as that is an accepted meaning of the word, it is a meaning any other reader of the correspondence could apply and it is the meaning [redacted by DPF] took from the use of the term.

I find that an elected member describing a correspondent on a social media platform such as X as a nonce, and therefore as a paedophile, constitutes a failure to remember the respect and dignity of the elected member’s office when dealing with the public. It is also a failure to accord respect to an individual citizen, even if the identity of the citizen is unknown at the time the comment is made. I, therefore, find that Mr McNulty breached the Council Code of Conduct.

As remedies, [redacted by DPF] seeks a public apology, damages, a formal censure from Council and removal of Mr McNulty from the role of Deputy Mayor.

In relation to the claims for remedies I find:

• As the statement made by Mr McNulty was made in a public forum, he should make an acknowledgement publicly and privately that the use of a pejorative term like “nonce” is inappropriate. I say more below about how this remedy is to be met.
• There is no basis to claim damages whether from Mr McNulty or the Council. Damages are normally sought when there is harm to reputation. [redacted by DPF]’s participation in the exchange on X was anonymous (his identity was not known). Using an offensive term in a public forum about a person whose identity is not known cannot cause harm to that person. An essential requirement of a successful defamation claim is that the person claiming to have suffered damage to their reputation as a consequence of a statement made about them is identifiable to a reasonable person hearing or seeing the statement when it is made. No reasonable person could identify [redacted by DPF] as the person about whom Mr McNulty’s statement was made. In dealing with this complaint, the issue of the anonymous nature of [redacted by DPF]’s participation in the exchange between him and Mr McNulty was expressly raised with [redacted by DPF] and a comment sought from him. [redacted by DPF] made no comment on this point.
• In relation to a formal censure, this decision amounts to a formal finding that Mr McNulty has breached the Council Code of Conduct. I do not consider any further action is needed.
• In relation to the claim that Mr McNulty should be removed from his role, such a remedy would be disproportionate to the wrong that was done. Although it is clear Mr McNulty intended to use a disparaging term in his exchange with the X interlocutor, he did not intend to use a term meaning “paedophile”. He was responding to a provocative statement to the effect he was not fit for public office. In this respect, [redacted by DPF] does not come to this complaints process with clean hands. The remedies should reflect this.

The post Wellington Deputy Mayor found in breach of code of conduct first appeared on Kiwiblog.