Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Julie Philips, Gordon Ball and Cllr Sam Pearce-Kearney.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 August 2022 were presented for consideration, and it was,

Resolved:

To approve and sign the minutes as a true and correct record.

To receive any declarations of disclosable interests, or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.

There were no declarations.

To note the procedure and assessment criteria for the meeting.

The procedure and criteria were noted.

To consider passing the following resolution:

To agree that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to exclude the public from the meeting for the business specified in Agenda Item Numbers 6 onwards, because it is likely that if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act and the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information to the public.

Paragraph 1 - information relating to an individual

It was,

Resolved:

To agree that in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 to exclude the public from the meeting for the business specified in Minute Number 76, because it is likely that if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act and the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information to the public.

Paragraph 1 -information relating to an individual

Complaints were submitted by Jon Sloan and Matthew Bell, the Complainants, regarding the conduct of Councillors Alexandra Boyd, Gail Moore, and Alan Crossley, the Subject Members, of Wilton Town council.  The complaint related to disclosure of interests and associated actions, and in one case an allegation of trespass.

Preamble

The Sub-Committee considered the initial tests of the assessment criteria and if these had been met, including that the Subject Members were and remain members of Wilton Town Council and that a copy of the relevant Code of Conduct was provided for the assessment.

The Sub-Committee then had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of the Code of Conduct. If the Sub-Committee concluded that the alleged behaviour would amount to a breach, then it would have to go on to decide whether it was appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the original complaints and supporting information, the response of the Subject Members, and the report of the Monitoring Officer.

The Sub-Committee also considered a written statement from the Complaint for COC141392 provided at the Assessment Sub-Committee meeting on 29 September 2022. None of the parties were in attendance.

Discussion

The complaints were interrelated and, with exception of COC141392, relating to the same issues, being the disclosure of pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests, and involvement in meetings and decisions to which those interests allegedly related. The Complainants consider that the Subject Members had conflicts of interest as a result and should not have participated in the meetings or discussions.

The Subject Members contended that the distance of their properties from the development, or in one case that they rent rather than own the property, was such that they did not have disclosable interests in the manner alleged.

In relation to COC141392, the Subject Member had offered an apology for his actions, which had been accepted by the Complainant.

Conclusion

The proper registration and declaration of pecuniary interests is of primary importance for any elected member, and the Code contained details and guidance on appropriate actions in the event of having such interests.

In this case the Subject Members’ own homes or reside on an estate which included a number of planning applications from the developers of the estate.

The Sub-Committee did not consider that the evidence submitted as to the interests of the Subject Members, if proven, would amount to a breach of the Code. Nor would further investigation likely uncover any additional information which would affect that view, and accordingly there was no public interest in the complaint being considered further.

Simply residing on an estate which was subject to or part of a planning application could not, in the view of the Sub-Committee, be taken as forming a matter which ‘directly relates’ to an interest, in this case the homes of the Subject Members.

The guidance to the Code provided advice on disclosure and withdrawing in the event of an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.