THE Town Hall’s head of HR has suggested mandatory “anti-racism training” should be considered for all councillors after an internal investigation into comments made in a confidential meeting.

The recommendation came in a report compiled by Jo Brown, the council’s director of people, following concerns stemming from a report that a black support officer had felt staff had been treated unfairly. Her findings found no evidence of overt racism.

The New Journal reported earlier this month how chief executive Jenny Rowlands had launched an immediate inquiry into the comments made in a “safe space” session attended by both officers and councillors which discussed possible “micro-aggressions”.

Ms Brown said in her report, which was shared privately with councillors this week: “The essence of the disclosure was that there was a councillor who preferred to work with white rather than black member support officers… Exact recollections of what was said did differ across the small breakout group.”

It added “Consistently it was heard that there was a member who preferred to nominate who they worked with and the person they nominated was white.”

The member of staff who spoke did so under the expectation that it would stay in-house but anger and concern at what had been said led to the account being shared more widely. The name of the councillor involved has not been provided.

Ms Brown said in her report: “They [the officer] confirmed that they gave this as an example of a micro-aggression or potential unconscious bias. Their belief was that this particular councillor may well have had an unconscious bias against black members of staff rather than anything conscious and overt. They said that ‘the demand wasn’t always as obvious as them demanding specifically for a white support worker’.”

She added: “The individual was also very clear to me that this was not an allegation of racism against this councillor. They described this as an example of their lived experience which led this individual to draw their own conclusions as to the reasons behind the behaviour. It is the view of the individual that what was said in the session has later been misrepresented.”

Ms Brown said there were other possible reasons for the reported behaviour.

“No evidence has been provided to suggest these exceptions have been based on race, however it cannot be entirely ruled out that these are examples of unconscious bias,” the report said.

“Having also looked at the data there are no patterns to suggest we have members who are or have only ever been supported by white members of staff.”

In her final recommendations, she suggested that the council consult with party whips on whether anti-racism training should be mandatory.

Twenty out of 54 councillors took part in the recent session, although across the organisation 3,200 members of staff have participated, detailing their own experiences. Camden has declared itself an “anti-racist” authority – meaning not being racist is not enough, and that it has to go further and call out discrimination wherever it is revealed.

Ms Rowlands has invited Althea Loderick, the chief executive of Newham Council, to scrutinise Camden’s work on this.

A council spokesperson said: “This has been a thorough investigation involving the right people whilst balancing the need for transparency with our duty to protect the member of staff. “We have taken steps to ensure no colleague feels influenced to take a particular course of action as this would go completely against our anti-racism approach.

“This has included the provision of confidential routes to trusted senior leaders to raise further concerns or provide additional information, as well as through the Camden Black Workers Group.”