Council’s complaint against The Impartial Reporter dismissed by IPSO

The Council had raised concerns over several reports published by the newspaper, claiming that the coverage contained inaccuracies and amounted to harassment. However, following a thorough investigation, IPSO has concluded that there were no grounds to pursue the complaints.

The dispute centred around four articles published between April and May 2024. The articles, which included headlines such as “Feasting on Ratepayers: ‘The Very Hungry Councillors’” and “Gravy Train,” focused on the Council’s provision of free meals to Councillors at ratepayers’ expense. These reports sparked significant public interest, with allegations that the Council had been less than transparent in disclosing information related to the expenditure.

The first complaint pertained to an article headlined “Feasting on Ratepayers: ‘The Very Hungry Councillors’” which was published on 18 April 2024. The article appeared on the front page with the title “Gravy Train,” while a similar version was also available online.

The Council objected to several aspects of this report, claiming that it contained factual inaccuracies. Specifically, it argued that the article misrepresented the information provided by the Council in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request.

The second article, titled “Lack of openness in Council’s free meals is the real story,” published on the same date, was also challenged by the Council, alongside a subsequent report titled “Council launches probe to uncover leak,”published on 2 May 2024.

This latter article addressed the Council’s investigation into how details of the free meals had been leaked to the newspaper. The final article, “I wouldn’t lower myself to answer’ - Councillors grilled on food vote,” published on May 9, 2024, covered a Council meeting in which Councillors were questioned about their involvement in the decision to provide free meals.

Fermanagh and Omagh District Council raised several concerns regarding the accuracy of these articles, arguing that the reporting had misrepresented the information available in the FOI responses and had portrayed the Council unfairly.

One key aspect of the Council’s complaint was that The Impartial Reporter inaccurately claimed that the Council had redacted “key information” in its FOI response. The Council argued that, while some information — such as the names of the Councillors who proposed the motion for free meals — had been redacted, most of the relevant details, including the vote, costs, and meal choices, were made available.

The Council also contended that the article inaccurately suggested that details regarding the Councillors who availed of the free food were withheld under the Data Protection Act Additionally, the Council took issue with how The Impartial Reporter sourced some of its information, alleging that the newspaper had used details from an internal email that had been disclosed without authorisation. The Council argued that this was misleading and suggested that the information came from the FOI response, rather than an unauthorised source.

In response to these claims, IPSO carefully examined whether the articles breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice. After reviewing the Council’s submissions and the content of the articles, IPSO concluded that there was no breach of Clause 1.

FOI response had excluded the information provided by the Council.

Instead, the report referred to the vote being held confidentially and noted that the newspaper had obtained additional det ails regarding the Councillors who had availed of the free food.

Councillors who proposed the motion had indeed been redacted, IPSO found that it was not inaccurate or misleading for The Impartial Reporter to report that the FOI featured redactions.

Moreover, IPSO pointed out that the term “key information”

was a subjective characterisation, and it was not unreasonable for the newspaper to consider the redacted details as significant to the story. Given that the newspaper had not explicitly stated how the information was obtained, IPSO found no grounds to investigate the complaint further.

The Council also raised concerns regarding the use of information obtained through an internal email and Council meeting minutes that had been unofficially disclosed.

However, IPSO ruled that this issue did not relate to factual inaccuracies, but rather to the source of the information.

Since The Impartial Reporter did not claim that these details had been obtained through the FOI request, IPSO concluded that there was no breach of Clause 1 on this point.

In addition to concerns about accuracy, the Council also claimed that The Impartial Reporter’s coverage amounted to harassment, citing Clause 3 (Harassment) of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The Council argued that the publication of four articles on the same issue within a three-week period constituted persistent pursuit. The Council also expressed concerns regarding the behaviour of journalists who approached Councillors for comments on the free meals.

IPSO, however, dismissed this aspect of the complaint as well. The press regulator explained that Clause 3 relates specifically to individuals and does not apply to organisations such as the Council. Furthermore, IPSO determined that the four articles in que st ion, w h ich focused on the actions of Councillors in their official capacities, did not amount to persistent pursuit.

Regarding the journalists’ approach to Councillors, IPSO noted that newspapers are entitled to approach individuals for comments on a story.

While the Council raised concerns about the nature of the approach, including allegations of laughter and whispered comments during interactions, IPSO found no evidence of intimidation or persistent pursuit in breach of Clause 3. The regulator emphasised that there was no indication that a request to desist had been made by the Councillors, nor had any such request been ignored by the journalists.

When contacted after IPSO dismissed their complaints, a Fermanagh and Omagh District Council spokesperson said: “Fermanagh and Omagh District Council is committed to ensuring that all our work is carried out professionally and in compliance with all relevant legislation.

“The Council is a fully accountable public body whose decision making is thorough, open and transparent.”