The decision by a Highland Council committee to allow a convicted rapist to retain his taxi operator's licences sparked widespread criticism - and highlights a striking pattern in how the councillors voted.

All four female councillors on the licensing committee voted to revoke the licences held by David Brown in June, while all six male councillors voted against the move.

The decision has sparked claims from female councillors that the men may have displayed a level of unconscious bias and had not stuck to the strict fit and proper person test they should have been applying.

The men, most of whom have since resigned from the committee, have defended their decisions and denied being misogynistic. New analysis by BBC Scotland suggests the division in the Brown case was not an isolated example.

Voting records show similar patterns in a number of disputed licensing decisions since the current committee was formed following the local elections in 2022.

Over that time, the committee considered licences involving information from Police Scotland on 77 occasions. In 29 cases there was a contested decision which resulted in a formal vote.

On 22 occasions, the female councillors all voted together in favour of the more punitive action - for example, not granting a licence or suspending an existing one. In 12 of these cases, this resulted in them being outvoted by male colleagues.

The figures do not explain why councillors reached their decisions, and members have rejected the suggestion that their votes were determined solely by gender.

All four female councillors were SNP representatives, but they said this had never been relevant to their voting pattern and they made their own decisions on a case-by-case basis.

The male councillors, who belonged to a number of different parties, have at various times given a range of reasons for reaching their decisions.

In the Brown case, this included seeking to avoid extra hardship for his wife and family.

Councillor John Grafton told the BBC the men had never come together as a group to agree a decision.

Licensing decisions are often taken in private because of legal restrictions about personal information.

However, a wider debate has emerged about how elected members balance public protection concerns against other factors.

When Police Scotland present to the committee they either make a recommendation against granting a licence, a recommendation in favour of suspending one, or give the relevant facts without a recommendation.

Speaking at a recent full council meeting, councillor John Finlayson, who was not one of the licensing committee members, said he thought police advice on public safety matters should largely be followed. "Most people in this chamber, when they receive information from the police, we tend to accept that information as being valid and really important," he said.

Councillor Lyndsey Johnston, who has been on the committee since her election in 2022, suggests a level of unconscious bias may play a role in decision-making. She says councillors could be doing more to challenge this within themselves.

Johnston said there had been poor attendance at the optional training which is available for councillors on the issue of violence against women and girls.

Kate MacLean, who has been on the committee since February 2025, has also referred to this during a council meeting. "It is those who need it most who often do not attend," she said. Others dispute that gender is the main explanation for the split in voting.

Councillor John Grafton, who has also been on the committee since 2022, agreed there was a pattern but feels there are other reasons behind it. "We are not misogynistic," he told the BBC.

"We haven't got together as a group. The decisions are not pre-decided." He feels that voting on licences can be extremely difficult as the police officer present at the meeting is often limited in what they can say - particularly if a live court case is relevant.

"Why have a police officer come into a meeting and say: 'I can't tell you anything'?" he asked.

"If councillors could have more information, they could make more sound decisions and there would be less risk." He says this particularly affects him as an autistic person who often looks for more information to make decisions.

After the Brown decision, some councillors publicly acknowledged that factors beyond the legal licensing test had influenced their thinking.

The committee's role is to only grant licences to those they consider to be fit and proper, and to suspend or revoke the licences of those who later fail to meet this bar.

Several of the councillors who voted against removing Brown's licences have said this test was not the basis of their decision.

Councillor Chris Birt, who has since been suspended from the SNP but remains on the licensing committee, told councillors that he "at no time (said) that Brown was fit and proper". He argued that the licence would have expired long before Brown could be eligible for parole. He also said women had contacted him to thank him for supporting Brown's family.

He made these statements during a motion of no confidence against him and the four other remaining councillors who had voted against taking action.

Willie MacKay had already quit as a councillor in the aftermath of the Brown vote.

The five councillors lost the motion by a margin of 45-6, with five abstentions, although this did not force them to resign.

Grafton, who has been expelled from the Scottish Liberal Democrats, told the BBC that he and the others voted on Brown's licence "out of compassion for his wife and family".

He conceded that this was not the relevant legal issue but argued he could not "morally or ethically take a decision that would bring extra hardship on a family that was already suffering".

"The aim amongst (the male councillors) was certainly to help, but the mistake we made was going down a road that wasn't probably legally correct." Councillors Ruraidh Stewart and Duncan Macpherson declined to discuss details of the case during the no-confidence motion, saying they did not want to be drawn into divulging information which had been heard in private to defend their decisions.

They remain the group leaders of the Scottish Conservatives and the Highland Alliance on the council respectively.

Sean Kennedy, who resigned as both committee chairman and a member of the Highland Independents group, did not speak during the no-confidence motion. The fallout from the Brown vote has led to calls for wider reform.

A motion backed the committee's four female members, alongside three other councillors, secured an independent external review of the licensing committee to examine its culture, governance and accountability.

It was agreed the review would engage with groups or individuals with expertise in public protection and safeguarding, and violence against women and girls.

During the debate, Johnston stressed that the motion does not suggest women make better decisions than men.

"What it recognises is that people experience risk in different ways, because we experience the world differently," she told councillors.

Speaking to the BBC, she said: "It's about drawing a line under what's happened and making things better for people.

"At the end of the day, the four of us just want change that will keep the public safe." Grafton also welcomed the review, so long as it is "truly independent and able to give a report without feeling pressured by any political forces".

Birt, Stewart, Kennedy and MacPherson were also contacted by the BBC for comment. Meanwhile, the new licensing committee has four new members - three of whom are female.

Johnston said: "I get the feeling a lot of councillors will learn from what has happened." A Highland Council spokesperson said its members had agreed to commission an independent external review of licensing. "This includes an opportunity to review decision-making culture, governance arrangements and accountability mechanisms."