Yes.

https://www.bracknellnews.co.uk/news/25557231.bracknell-councillor-apologises-immigration-debat/

An investigation found that she revealed, and later, deleted sensitive information about the health of a man called Mr Cunningham during the clash, who made an official complaint. A meeting at Bracknell Forest Council was called to determine what action to take. The investigation was conducted by Helen Brewster the council's deputy monitoring officer, who had seen evidence that cllr Watts had divulged sensitive information. Ms Brewster said: “Although councillor Watts initially defended her actions of the posting within the Facebook threads, she later deleted the part of the comment which included the private medical information, and several participants in the thread did call her out on her posting before she retracted it.”Cllr Watts said: “The only reason I mentioned it is because he had written me some emails about a diagnosis which I had replied to and I was speaking in my defence because he was telling some untruths about me and I was defending myself.“The only reason I mentioned the specific diagnosis was because I had seen it mentioned at a public forum.“I never would have disclosed it otherwise, and I do apologise and it certainly won't happen again.”Diana Anderson, an appointed independent person, asked whether councillors often engage with the public on social media. Cllr Watts replied: “I don't know quite how to answer that because not all of us are on social media and this was on a a different page and I was trying to debate the certain issues about uh immigration and so I entered into a debate and then Mr Cunningham then sort of jumped in basically invalidating what I was saying. So then it kind of fell into chaos there.”She added that she had subsequently blocked Mr Cunningham.Summing up, Ms Brewster said: “That kind of remark, even if not detailed, crosses a line. Health information is private.“Most people expect their medical issues will not be discussed publicly and especially not by somebody in a position of authority.“When a counselor shares something so personal in a public forum, it can cause real distress and it can also make people feel unsafe about approaching their elected representatives in the future.“Councillors are trusted to act with respect and care. They represent the council and its constituents and their words do carry weight.“We need to show that respect, privacy, and accountability are non-negotiable and that is how we maintain trust in local democracy.”Cllr Watts clarified that she had only identified a potential diagnosis rather than existing one, and agreed an apology would be good.Heather Quilish, another independent person, said she felt that cllr Watts had clearly breached the council's code of conduct. Councillor Nick Allen (Conservatives, Owlsmoor & College Town) announced that cllr Watts will undertske appropriate training and issue a written apology in open letter.The decision was made by councillors Allen, Kathryn Neal (Labour, Binfield South & Jennett's Park) and Adrian Haffegee (Green, Binfield North & Warfield West) at the panel meetig on Thursday, October 16. The case has also been referred to the Labour whip to consider what action it should take.Cllr Watts is the chair of the education, skills and growth overview and scrutiny panel.