A FOREST of Dean councillor faced calls to resign after admitting he punched a man in the face in an incident last May.

And, in a meeting of the full council which descended into chaotic scenes at the end of a long night, there were accusations and a staunch defence of authority officers on the way an investigation into the attack was handled.

A investigation into the attack by Cllr Hogan on a man outside The Colliers Inn, Lydbrook, by the new Standards Panel was upheld.

The panel decided that he should be removed from a role he had with the Citizens Advice Bureau.

However, while Cllr Hogan admitted his guilt, he attempted to ‘call into question the process by which the panel reached its conclusion’.

This was the first time that the new Standards Panel had delivered a judgement on a complaint against a councillor since replacing the previous Standards Committee.

The Standards Panel was introduced in May this year and is made up of three independent people taken from a pool of five who look into the conduct, behaviour and standards of the members and can sanction them or recommend they are reported to the police for more serious action.

The Labour councillor for Lydbrook and Ruardean has not been reported to the police, but several members demanded that he consider his position during an acrimonious debate.

Cllr Hogan, a member of the authority for two decades and a former leader of the Labour group at the council, said: “The Standards Panel .. concludes that I was in breach of the Code of Conduct due to my actions outside a local public house.

“My motive in bringing this motion is not to challenge the conclusion of the Panel, for there is no right to appeal, but to call into question the process by which the panel reached its conclusion.

“In doing so, I hope to protect fellow members from a flawed process that could, as this has done, cause them considerable reputational damage.”

Comments made by Cllr Hogan about a council officer caused chairman Cllr Marillyn Smart to jump from her chair and demand: “Cllr Hogan – stop!”

She added: “What did I say when I talked to you about the Code of Conduct (at the start of the meeting). Please do not refer to an officer of the council like that.”

The council’s most senior legal officer, Claire Hughes, said a motion initially submitted by Cllr Hogan could have tied the hands of the Standards Panel while investigating matters.

She said: “It is true that Cllr Hogan submitted a motion that, when first submitted, I ruled to be unacceptable for this meeting.

“The reason for that was it is not possible to simply have a motion which restricts our Standards Panel to such an extent that it would fetter our discretion and take what action is appropriate for this council.”

“I understand the issue about taking it through a criminal process first and I accept that fully, however, there are instances where people do not want to report things to the police.

“If people do not report things to the police, it is totally unacceptable that this council would say ‘oh well, because it has not been through the criminal process, we will not deal with this conduct’.”

While two members backed Cllr Hogan’s stance in the meeting, others wanted him to quit.

Vice chairman James Bevan said: “I fail to understand why Cllr Hogan insisted on bringing this pathetic and personal agenda before us tonight.

“He has admitted that he has punched the guy, he has brought this council into disrepute by his actions and may I suggest he does the decent thing and resign from this authority.”

Cllr Andrew Gardiner, who lodged the complaint said: “Given he has now brought the whole Forest of Dean Council into disrepute by violently punching a member of the public in the face, Cllr Hogan should consider his position and resign from this council and Lydbrook (Parish) Council.”

However, Cllr Hogan was defended by Conservative councillor Richard Boyles who said: “What Cllr Hogan is seeking here is natural justice under British law which is the right to mount a defence.

“He could have had – or may have a very valid – case of self-defence and, if he had one, he would have been found not guilty in a court of law.

“Then the Standards Panel could have come to a completely different conclusion – and that’s the rub,” he added.