| Place: | Oaks Room, Civic Centre, West Paddock, Leyland, PR25 1DH |
| Present: | Mr J Holt (independent chair), Councillors Edwards, K W Palmer and B Yates, Independent Member Mr S Ellison, Parish Councillors Mrs M Gelder and Mrs E Houghton |
| In attendance: | John Dakin (Corporate Director (Policy and Neighbourhoods)), Maureen Wood (Head of Corporate Governance), David Whelan (Legal Services Manager) and Carol Eddleston (Democratic Services Officer). |
| Public attendance: | 1 member of the public was present. |
| Other Officers: | No other officers were in attendance. Other attendance 1 town councillor and 2 dual-hatted borough/town councillors were present. |
| Item | Description/Resolution | Status | Action | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OPEN ITEMS | ||||
| 7 |
Apologies for Absence Apologies were submitted on behalf of Russell Atkinson (Independent Chairman) and Councillors Heyworth and Mrs Robinson. |
Noted | ||
| 8 |
Declarations of Interest Councillor Palmer said that he had consulted with officers in advance of the meeting and he had concluded that he did not need to declare a prejudicial interest as a borough councillor. |
Noted | ||
| 9 |
Minutes of the Last Meeting Minutes attached The minutes were approved as a correct record and signed by the chairman. |
Agreed | ||
| 10 |
Request for Dispensation - Penwortham Priory ? Dual Use Centre Report attached Prior to discussion of this item, the member of the public present enquired whether the composition of the standards committee was in accordance with the council?s own constitution which stated that ?The Standards Committee shall comprise: a member from each political group on the Council etc?. Officers assured the meeting that the make-up of the committee was in accordance with national regulations and Standards Board for England guidance and that it was lawful for the committee to continue its business. The member of the public said that he considered that Penwortham Town Council had shown this council disrespect by calling a special meeting on 16 July, before a meeting of this standards committee had taken place to consider granting a dispensation. Town Councillor Howarth explained that the town council had had to cancel the meeting scheduled for 16 July as it would have been inquorate and, should the standards committee decide not to grant dispensations, the meeting called for 28 July would also have to be cancelled. The chairman introduced the report outlining applications from a number of dual-hatted town and borough councillors for a dispensation to enable them to take part and vote on any consideration of possible financial assistance in support of the revised access project at the Penwortham Priory Sports and Technology College. The chairman emphasised that the purpose of the standards committee meeting was to consider the requests for dispensation and not the issue which would be discussed at the town council meeting. Borough and Town Councillor Best informed the meeting that he had been on holiday when he had received notification of the special town council meeting scheduled for 16 July and had been surprised at the speed with which the meeting had been arranged. He said he was also speaking on behalf of Borough, County and Town Councillor Mrs Blow. He believed that he and a number of other members of the town council had a prejudicial interest in this item and that, as such, the meeting would not have been quorate. He had strong views on the topic and was aware that the members concerned would not be able to speak on the matter at the town council if they did not apply for, and were not granted, dispensations. Councillor Best informed the meeting that, whilst protracted discussions around the dual-use agreement had been ongoing for a long time, the town council had not been involved before now and the decision to call a meeting of the town council had been made following an approach by borough councillors. He outlined the various party and borough council roles and responsibilities of the members who had applied for dispensations and said that he wanted to take part in the discussion but he felt that the interest would continue to exist even if a dispensation were to be granted. Town Councillor Howarth said that he had been a town councillor for 14 years and was also a governor at Priory High School. He wished to oppose the granting of the dispensation which he felt would effectively lead to some of the town council reserves being handed over to the borough council. He echoed Councillor Best?s comments that the dual-use agreement had never been considered by the town council in the past. He believed that a contribution from the town council would benefit only the borough council and would be to the detriment of the residents of Penwortham. He concluded that the conflict of interest was too great to allow the matter to be open to outside interests. The Legal Services Manager pointed out that guidance from the Standards Board for England advised that Standards committees could grant a dispensation if more than 50% of members had a prejudicial interest in an item of business to be discussed at a meeting which was covered by their code of conduct. Independent and parish council members on the committee believed that a debate at the town council level was needed but, whilst they acknowledged that they were not being asked to comment on the possible outcome of that debate, they still had some concerns about the possible financial ramifications in view of the size of the majority of dual-hatted members from one party. Borough council members on the committee felt it was inappropriate to assume at this stage that the decision would be in favour of making a financial contribution. They said that the dual-hatted members were aware of the obligations on them under the Code of Conduct for Elected Members and would make a decision on the night, based on the information before them and on what they believed best served their residents. They believed that councillors who had been elected to represent the residents in their wards should be able to speak and vote on matters which affected those residents. The committee was mindful of the fact that the issue could not be discussed at the town council meeting unless dispensations were granted and considered a number of possible scenarios before coming to a resolution: ? Dispensations could be granted to all of the members to enable them to debate and vote on the matter; ? Dispensations could be granted to some of the members but not others, to enable them to debate and vote on the matter, depending on the perceived level of prejudice; ? Dispensations could be granted to the members to allow them to make representations on the matter but not to vote. RESOLVED: 1) that dispensations not be granted to Councillor Stephen Robinson due to his role as South Ribble Borough Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, nor to Councillor Mrs Robinson as his spouse, 2) that, after careful consideration, and, mindful of the fact that without dispensations the democratically elected Town Council would not be able to discuss an item of its business nor make a decision thereon, dispensations be granted to Councillors Best, Mrs Blow, Clegg, Mrs D Gardner, M Gardner, Hancock, Mrs Jenny Hothersall, Jim Hothersall and Mrs Woollard, to allow them to take part in, and vote on, any debates relating to the issue of making a financial contribution to works to be undertaken at Penwortham Priory High School and Penwortham Leisure Centre, and 3) that the dispensations granted in 2) above be valid for a period of six months from the date of this resolution (from 22 July 2009 to 22 January 2010). |
Agreed | ||