In a controversial decision, a Kent County Council cabinet member has avoided any disciplinary action over a message in which he expressed a desire to “punch” an anonymous colleague. Peter Osborne, a Reform UK councillor responsible for transport, made the remark in a leaked WhatsApp exchange, sparking outrage from opposition leaders.
The text message, sent in the wake of a heated party meeting, read: “I’m hoping this mole is a bloke so I can punch him right in the jaw.” Osbourne had previously defended the comment, stating it was “made out of frustration at the circumstances, which I’m sure many will understand, rather than malice.”
Despite complaints from the Liberal Democrats, Greens, Labour, Conservatives and Independent Reformers that Osbourne had breached the council’s code of conduct through “intimidating behaviour,” the council has decided not to take any action. In a statement, the council said it did not believe Osbourne was acting as a councillor when he sent the message, and that the remark was not serious enough to warrant further action.
Liberal Democrat group leader Antony Hook criticised the decision, saying “it is unacceptable for a councillor to tell their colleagues that they want to punch one of them.” Bill Barrett, who leads the Independent Reformers after being kicked out of Reform UK, described the case dismissal as “very worrying,” adding that “apparently a councillor can say anything threatening or insulting they like on internal political WhatsApp groups and there is no sanction.”
The controversial decision has sparked concerns over the council’s handling of misconduct allegations. Conservative group leader Harry Rayner has indicated he will be “exploring avenues” to challenge the complaint dismissal, while Reform UK has dismissed the initial complaints as “faux outrage.”
The incident comes amid a wider row within the Reform UK party, with the council recently suspending five other councillors amid a video controversy. The council’s refusal to take action against Osbourne’s remarks has only served to further inflame tensions within Kent’s political landscape.
