Teignbridge Turmoil: Councillor Misconduct and the Fight for Transparency

A fresh investigation into councillor misconduct at Teignbridge District Council (TDC) has once again highlighted the culture of impunity that has long plagued the authority. While recent headlines focus on the council’s "zero-tolerance approach" to swearing and disruptive behaviour, the real issue remains unaddressed: the suppression of whistleblowers, manipulation of governance, and cover-ups surrounding planning corruption.

For nearly two decades, Robert Wakeling, a former council standards committee member, has fought to expose corruption in Teignbridge’s planning system. His claims—supported by extensive documentation—reveal misconduct and collusion not only within the council but also among regulatory bodies meant to uphold transparency and accountability.

A Council in Crisis

The recent audit by Grant Thornton and the Local Government Ombudsman’s (LGO) ruling against TDC’s handling of misconduct cases confirm that the council repeatedly dismissed legitimate complaints. While Grant Thornton’s report acknowledges governance failures and reputational damage, it avoids addressing how this culture has enabled planning corruption and the suppression of whistleblowers.

Miles Davis’ recent BBC report, Councillors Told to Stop Swearing and Show Respect, sheds light on the dysfunction within Teignbridge District Council, focusing on the Grant Thornton audit and the council’s efforts to enforce behavioural standards among its members. While his article highlights the toxic working culture and the auditor’s concerns about councillor conduct, this piece builds upon those findings by examining the deeper governance crisis at Teignbridge—one that extends far beyond swearing and shouting. The real issue is not councillors muting microphones but the suppression of whistleblowers, manipulation of regulatory processes, and the systemic cover-up of planning corruption. Davis’ reporting provides a crucial backdrop to understanding how Teignbridge presents a fa?ade of reform while evading accountability for its more serious failings.

The LGO findings (December 2022) on Councillor Richard Daws provide a key example of how TDC officers—led by Managing Director Phil Shears—have misused the Standards Committee to suppress councillors who challenge misconduct. Daws’ case is not an isolated incident; it follows a pattern of weaponising regulatory procedures to silence dissenters, just as seen with Wakeling’s planning corruption complaints.

The Battle Over Planning Transparency

Wakeling’s legal fight began in 2006 when his modest planning application was unlawfully denied under unadopted draft policies, a clear violation of statutory planning law. Over the years, he has documented a pattern of abuses where applications benefiting politically connected developers were fast-tracked while those questioning the process were subjected to procedural obstruction and victimisation.

The Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI), the Planning Inspectorate (PINS), and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) have all been implicated in either covering up or ignoring these allegations. The Court of Appeal is currently considering whether to grant permission for Wakeling to challenge a tribunal decision that upheld the ICO’s refusal to release key planning documents.

Among his claims:

• Conflicts of interest involving Teignbridge’s Data Protection Officer, Sue Heath, who also served as a senior auditor, compromising independent oversight.
• Emails showing ICO collusion in classifying his FOIA requests as “vexatious,” effectively blocking scrutiny.
• Undeclared financial interests influencing planning decisions.

The LGO ruling against TDC confirms a systematic misuse of standards investigations, reinforcing Wakeling’s claims that the council has operated as a closed network protecting its own interests.

Regulatory Collusion & The Role of Grant Thornton

A misdirected email from a Grant Thornton partner, which Wakeling received in error, suggested an attempt to influence an audit investigation into TDC. When Wakeling filed a Subject Access Request (SAR) to obtain the full communication, key emails were omitted while irrelevant commentary aimed at discrediting him was included.

Grant Thornton has audited TDC since 2020, meaning they cannot claim ignorance of these systemic failings. Their audit report acknowledged governance failures but conveniently ignored evidence of planning corruption and financial misconduct, both of which Wakeling has exposed in formal objections to the accounts.

A National Test for Transparency

This case is no longer just about Teignbridge—it raises wider concerns about accountability in UK governance. Reports from Transparency International and Parliamentary inquiries have long warned of corruption risks in the planning system, yet meaningful enforcement remains absent.

With MP Mel Stride now facing allegations of fabricating a ministerial response to inquiries about planning misconduct, the political stakes continue to rise. If the Court of Appeal upholds the ICO’s refusal to disclose key documents, it will set a dangerous precedent allowing regulatory bodies to suppress evidence with impunity.

What Happens Next?

Wakeling’s appeal is pending, and he is escalating his case through media channels, whistleblower organisations, and public accountability initiatives.

• BBC Spotlight has been approached with supporting evidence.
• A formal challenge against Grant Thornton is under review.
• Potential referrals to the National Audit Office (NAO) and Financial Reporting Council (FRC) are being considered.

Wakeling is clear in his stance:

"This isn’t just about me. It’s about ensuring a fair and transparent planning system. If we don’t act now, public trust will be irreparably damaged."

For now, TDC’s councillors may have been told to stop swearing—but unless these deeper issues are addressed, the real corruption at the heart of the council will remain hidden.

Disclaimer:This article is based on publicly available information, witness testimonies, and verified reports. Any allegations mentioned are subject to ongoing legal and regulatory review. Readers should independently verify claims and seek legal advice if required.