Can you be an effective councillor from 218 miles away?

Owl has received the email below from an anonymous source.  However, on checking, it does appear correct – the person in question who wants to represent Sidmouth Sidford [edited from Sidbury – ed mistake] ward as a Conservative will need to spend the majority of his time in Cambridge for the foreseeable future.

Gosh – that’s 50 miles further than our London-based MP – who we rarely see!

Information: The AA

“As an elector who takes an interest in who might be representing us on the incoming District Council, I was pleased to see that a young man was standing in the Sidmouth Sidford ward.

However, my pleasure then turned to uncertainty when I realised that this young man is student at Robinson College in Cambridge. It appears that he started his degree course in the autumn of 2018.

I then asked myself the question – how will someone who must surely have to spend much of his time studying in Cambridge over the next few years be able to full represent the electors in Sidford as well as playing a full part in District Council activities? AND University life?

I see that the distance between Sidford, which would be where his electors live, and Cambridge, where he will be studying for his degree is a good 218 miles which on a good day could take upwards of 4 hours to drive.

This has all left me a bit bemused as to how this young man, will be able to balance his studying, with effectively representing his electors, with having a reasonable social and family life.

Is this really fair on young Zachary Marsh – or is his political party so short of candidates that it thinks its right to have an elected Councillor who would live so far away from those he wants to represent?

A concerned elector”

Politics: when your (very recent) past comes back to bite you

And why Independents make sense – no party line, no whipping.

“Activists for political parties are hardy souls.

They’re used to braving the elements, leafleting and door knocking in the depths of midwinter and encountering the uninterested, the unruly and even the odd bloodthirsty dog.

But from conversations I’ve been having with councillors and council candidates from both main parties over the past few days, all campaigning for next month’s local elections, the reaction they’ve received this time round has been of a quite different order.

The Tories, most of all, are in abject despair with many believing they are heading for the drubbing of their lives.

One, a local chairman from Essex, told me that his prime minister’s actions represent “an absolute betrayal of the British people”.

He told me: “Next month’s elections are going to be absolutely pivotal – we are going to get absolutely hammered.

“We are struggling to get anyone to deliver leaflets, even members of our executive don’t want to go out.”

This theme of Conservatives being unable to turn out their own members was commonplace across the country.

One exasperated Tory councillor told me: “Every association I’ve spoken to are struggling to get their members out.

“Members are saying, why should I get s*** on the doorstep and doors slammed in my face when I’m as angry as they are?”

Most are unequivocal: they blame Theresa May and want her to go. “It isn’t just six weeks of incompetence, it’s two and a half years.”

But this isn’t just a rejection of the Tory party and Theresa May, the backlash extends to Labour too.

I’ve spoken to a score of Labour councillors from up and down the country who are deeply concerned about the reaction they’re getting. …”

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-backlash-party-activists-fear-hostility-could-turn-sinister-11691211

28 days until local elections – today’s picture

This is EDDC CEO and Electoral Officer (extra pay for that) piano playing with Streetscene workers on one of those “look at me I’m just like you” PR stunts.

You know, the bloke who “lost” 6,000 voters and hasn’t got the mechanism for online checking of where you should go to vote working. The one who was hauled before a parliamentary committee to explain himself:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2014/10/13/highlights-of-mr-williams-audio-transcript-of-evidence-to-the-parliamentary-select-committee-on-voter-engagement/

Time for all sorts of changes to the status quo.

[Apologies for Owl’s poor maths -28 days to voting today – it needs to have a refresher course at Hogwarts]

Local Tories panic at last minute – and ask what you think (too little, too late!)

The Local Tories are asking the electorate at the 11th Hour! (A BIT TOO LATE!).

Why?

Because they know they have let us down, while Independent councillors have been fighting our battles, not them!

Whilst our Independent District Councillors have been listening and dealing with local people’s issues and concerns for years the “East Devon Conservative Association” may be waking up to the fact that rather than follow their Central Offices National Policies, they maybe should listen occasionally to what is happening in their local area!

A questionnaire is being distributed by the East Devon Branch of the Conservative Party, just 5 weeks before Local Parish Town and District Elections asking for local people’s thoughts!

There is however a “health warning” on the leaflet in very small print!

The types of information we may collect about you, will probably include your name, address, and contact information and information about your ethnic origin, political opinions, and religious, philosophical and other beliefs. The data you provide will be retained by the Conservative Party, its Candidates and its MPs”.

Nice to know the Tories want to collate a database on us!

The questionnaire first asks several questions about the ward and then asks
“Are there any local issues or concerns you would like to raise?

Then they ask which of 14 issues are the 3 issues that should be prioritised. Looking at the list most local people would hope that their Councillors were concentrating on ALL of them, but at least the local Conservatives MIGHT spend some time on 3 local issues which is a start!

On the second page it becomes even more amusing!

Q: What Conservative commitments are the most important to you?

Make a success of Brexit”
(guessing the leaflet was planned some time ago!)

First one on the list is Not really a local issue, but the you would not think that the turmoil in Parliament and Brussels was anything like a “success”!

Q: “Cut the Deficit and deal with our country’s debts.”

This could be translated as: Do you approve of austerity and the selling off of public assets.

Again, not much of a local concern, except for the closing of local hospital beds, reduction in funding for all local services, no spending on our local infrastructure but the Government spending billions on HS2 to connect London and Birmingham and Cross Rail connecting one part of London to the other!

Q:“Continue to increase housebuilding and support home ownership”.

East Devon is already building more than 950 new houses per year, but the Tories want more and more! What local people want is “the right houses, built to the right quality, in the right place, at the right time”. Not what we are getting which are large, expensive housing estates that look like “everywhere land!”.

Q: Cut income tax by raising personal allowances.

If you earn enough to pay tax that’s fine, but the less well off become even further left in crisis with the cutting of social services! And what about all those billionaire donors – some paying no tax in this country at all!

Q: Ensure that pensions continue to rise annually.

Anything to keep pensions in line with inflation is good but reducing public services for the elderly affects their quality of life! And “rising annually” is no good if increases are below the cost of living and savings earn nothing and then go to fund home or nursing home care.

Q: Ensure the welfare and benefit system is fair and rewards work.

Just one comment here “Universal Credit! It’s NOT working!

Q: Continue to increase NHS spending.

Local NHS spending has been and is being cut and all our services at breaking point! Nine hours for an ambulance to turn up for a pensioner with a broken hip in Exmouth! And a CCG that has said it will cut HALF A BILLION pounds more in the next few years.

Q: Control and reduce immigration.

They cannot control migration if they cannot sort out a Brexit deal! And SOME immigration (such as health care workers) is urgently needed. And they have already confessed that immigration will now come from India and the Phillipines rather than the EU!

Q: Protect spending on schools.

Only this week our largest secondary school in the district asked parents to contribute to the funding! And academy schools pay their heads and directors hundreds of thousands of pounds – and then often go bust!

Q: Invest our National Security and defence.

It is a known fact that we are spending less on our armed forces and the police. These cuts can be seen with less police on our streets, crime seemingly increasing and less arrests and weaker sentences for those that are apprehended!

This is Our governing Political Party and our governing East Devon councillors asking these ridiculous questions!

You are asked to tick which 2 are important to you! Again, most people would say they are all important!!

You are then asked what party you voted for last time and which party you may consider voting for this time around, and finally asking you if you want to help or even join the Conservative Party! Remember, all this data on you is kept for later use (or sale).

What’s the alternative?

This questionnaire graphically demonstrates how out of touch this national and local political party is!!

Don’t reply to add to their already large database on you but elect a local INDEPENDENT candidate, already in touch with the electorate and already fighting on your behalf!

Seaton Lib Dem Councillor ‘censors’ councillor publicising bus consultation

Astounding that something as neutral (and important) as a consultation on changes to major bus routes to and from Seaton should be censored. And even a pitiful and low-bar excuse of a ‘political post’ (assuming that is the reason) doesn’t hold water as Councillor Shaw is not up for re-election until 2022!

Councillor Burrows, in the other hand, IS up for re-election on 2 May 2019 – even though he had to resign as Mayor, admitted that he had brought the town council into disrepute AND was censured by EDDC – if the Lib Dems can’t find a better candidate! If they can’t, it really doesn’t say much for the quality of their current membership in Seaton!

From the blog of Seaton and Colyton East Devon Alliance DCC Councillor Martin Shaw:

“Seaton EDDC and town councillor Peter Burrows (pictured in his Facebook logo with the late Liberal Democrat leader, Paddy Ashdown) resigned as mayor in January after self-confessedly ‘bringing the town council into disrepute’ after abusing a ‘Tourist Information Centre’ Twitter account to pursue a personal grudge.

Now, in the very week in which East Devon’s Monitoring Officer has formally censured him on four counts, Burrows and his co-administrator, Tony Antoniou, have abused their positions as admins on a community Facebook group to remove me from the group, as I found when I tried to post details of the Stagecoach bus consultation to the group, to which I’ve belonged for years. No warning was given and neither has responded to requests for an explanation.

This example of arbitrary censorship raises two fingers to Town Council recommendations – in response to Burrows’ January actions and expected to be adopted in two weeks’ time – that councillors should ‘behave responsibly, considerately and professionally’ on social media and should NOT be Facebook admins.

It is laughable for Burrows to call himself a Liberal Democrat. This self-appointed Town Censor has no respect for the idea that a community Facebook group – the group in question is called Positive Development for Everyone in Seaton and was set up after a community meeting – should be open to a County Councillor to post important local information, and indeed for members to express views different from the admins’.

There is a long history of Burrows arbitrarily removing people and posts from different Facebook groups. I have considerable respect for the Liberal Democrats – their members on the County Council are fine councillors and I work with them closely – but Burrows is bringing his party into disrepute. I am reporting him to their regional organisation for his latest antics.”

Seaton’s rogue councillor is at it again on Facebook. I’m reporting him to the Liberal Democrats, because this self-appointed Town Censor certainly isn’t a liberal. Paddy Ashdown must be turning in his grave.

Corruption ad poor police investigatillon of it in local elections

The 2014 election victory by Lutfur Rahman in the contest for Mayor of Tower of Hamlets was eventually over-turned for electoral corruption, but police investigations did not result in criminal convictions. The resulting controversy over the police’s actions resulted in Operation Lynemouth: an investigation into what the police did and why.

The final report from Operation Lynemouth is now out, and it is pretty damning:

The policing of the election and the subsequent investigation were deficient in too many areas. There was a lack of corporate responsibility, a lack of training and insufficient resources for the MPS’s special enquiry team’s investigation. We were also concerned that, when another MPS department investigated allegations other than electoral fraud, potential lines of enquiry were disregarded. Furthermore, there was an otherwise uncoordinated approach to all the investigations, with little oversight at a senior officer level for the first year, which meant that opportunities might have been missed.

Scope has also been identified for a new police investigation:

Operation Lynemouth’s investigators have identified avenues of enquiry that can still be explored, and City of London Police has agreed to undertake an independent criminal investigation.”

Operation Lynemouth: final report

Here is the full report”

Click to access Operation-Lynemouth-review-of-police-handling-of-electoral-corruption-allegations-in-Tower-Hamlets.pdf

https://www.markpack.org.uk/157907/operation-lynemouth-tower-hamlets/

Bojo says historic child abuse inquiries are a waste of money (he wasted at least £940m as London Mayor)

Maybe because several abusers appear to have been MPs or others (still) in power? And he’s the man whose failed Mayor of London projects cost an estimated £940 million!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/18/bridge-940m-bill-boris-johnsons-mayora-vanity-projects-garden-bridge-routemaster-bus

“Boris Johnson has declared money spent on non-recent child abuse investigations had been “spaffed up a wall”, prompting immediate criticism from Labour for making reckless and inappropriate comments.

The current favourite to succeed Theresa May as Conservative leader was arguing police time and resources were being wasted on crimes committed years ago as he was questioned on an LBC radio phone-in on Wednesday morning.

But he went on to complain: “And one comment I would make is I think an awful lot of money and an awful lot of police time now goes into these historic offences and all this malarkey.

“You know, £60m I saw was being spaffed up a wall on some investigation into historic child abuse and all this kind of thing. What on earth is that going to do to protect the public now?”

Louise Haigh, the shadow policing minister, said Johnson’s remarks were insulting to victims of abuse.

“Could you look the victims in the eye and tell them investigating and bringing to justice those who abused them, as children, is a waste of money?” she asked. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/13/boris-johnson-under-fire-over-remarks-about-child-abuse-inquiries

Local elections: Many independents throw their hats into ring in Sid Valley

“Sid Valley Democracy is calling for residents to stand as councillors in May for the 19 seats available.

The initiative says it wishes to ensure enough candidates for the seats to be contested after previous elections where there were not enough people, resulting in automatic appointment.

The informal group says 17 people have expressed an interest so far and have hosted meetings for prospective candidates to meet and find out more about the role.

On its Facebook page, the group said: “In most recent elections, so few candidates came forward, they were all automatically appointed – this has been the same for many town councils.

“The people behind this initiative believe that this is wrong.

“So without passing any judgement on the effectiveness of Sidmouth’s current town council, or indeed how democratically it operates, we have started the initiative to see if more people are interested in standing for election, giving Sid Valley residents a real choice come May 2.

“As well as candidates we’re also keen to get more people to vote, turnout at local elections is usually very low.”

The page has announced Charissa Evans, Peter Blackmore, Deidre Hounsom, John Loudoun, Denise Bickley, Cathy Gardner and Marianne Rixson plan to stand for seats.

Nomination packs are now available from the district council for those wishing to stand in district, town and parish elections.

Candidates must complete the forms and send them to the returning officer of East Devon District Council by 4pm on Wednesday, April 3.

The electorate will head to the polls to vote in district and town and parish elections on May 2.

The counting of the votes will take place in two locations at EDDC’s headquarters at Blackdown House, Honiton, and at Exmouth Town Hall.

District council votes will be counted and the results declared on Friday May 3, with contested town and parish elections, counted and announced on Saturday May 4.

If you would like a nomination pack, please contact the electoral services team on 01395 517402.”

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/sid-valley-democracy-launches-to-find-candidates-for-town-council-election-1-5925851

EDDC Monitoring Officer censures Seaton Lib Dem Councillor Peter Burrows

Recall that Owl broke the original story about Seaton Town Council and EDDC Lib Dem councillor Peter Burrows here:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/01/07/breaking-news-seaton-mayor-peter-burrows-resigns-after-bringing-the-office-into-disrepute/

and the updated story here:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/01/11/seaton-disgraced-ex-mayor-peter-burrows-town-council-responds-names-names/

Although Councillor Burrows resigned as Mayor of Seaton Town Council he did NOT resign as a town or district councillor. It remains to be seen if local Lib Dems select him again to stand for district council elections in May 2019.

Now EDDC’s Monitoring Officer has also given a statement.

On or around the 1st January 2019, Councillor Peter Burrows posted a tweet on the SeatonTIC Twitter account [which was not an official Seaton Town Council website or an official Seaton TIC but a personal account of Mr Burrows, now closed] which alleged that a local business had bad-mouthed “the Mayor of Seaton” and [he] asked people to avoid [using] that business.

The tweet was a direct response to comments made by an individual who Councillor Burrows believed worked at the business concerned. This was not the case and neither the business nor its owner had any involvement in the making of the comments in relation to Councillor Burrows.

The tweet was inappropriate and breached Seaton Town Council’s Code of Conduct in that;

It failed to promote and support high standards of conduct,

It failed to treat others with respect,

It could not be justified to the public.

Councillor Burrows conducted himself in a manner that brought his office and Seaton Town Council into disrepute.

Councillor Burrows is hereby formally censured for the breaches that have been found in relation to his entirely inappropriate tweet.”

Why all the good news? Because on 26 March “purdah” starts before local elections!

Expect a lot of good news from the majority party at EDDC for the rest of this month. Why? Because all political new from EDDC (not its individual councillors) has to STOP on 26 March 2019.

Why?

As local elections take place on 2 May 2019, a period of weeks before the election is called “purdah” and councils must stop pushing politicised events and publications to avoid charges of unduly influencing electors to vote for them.

A good explanation of purdah (and what to look out for if officers or councillors break these rules) can be found here:

https://www.local.gov.uk/about/our-meetings-and-leadership/political-composition/local-government-elections

“How to register to vote (spoiler: it’s very easy)”

“DON’T MISS OUT ON YOUR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS

Deadline to register

for the May 2019 local elections across large parts of England:

Friday 12 April

To be able to vote, you have to be on the electoral register and to do that, you have to fill in a simple online form. Completing other official paperwork, such as getting a passport, paying Council Tax or getting a driving license doesn’t result in you being automatically added to the register. It is a separate process.

You only need to register once; you don’t need to register separately for every election. However, you do need to register again if you change your address, name or nationality.

You have to be 18 on polling day to vote (or 16 for Scottish Parliament and local elections, along with some but not all referendums). For that reason, you can register in advance of your 18th birthday so that if an election is called whilst you are under-age but you will be 18 on polling day, you can therefore still get your vote.

EU citizens are able to vote in the UK by the way – for council elections although not for the Westminster Parliamentary elections. Commonwealth and Irish citizens can also register to vote and they’re allowed to vote in all types of elections.

To register online right now, head over to the official registration site:

https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote

If voting in person isn’t the right option for you, either for a temporary or permanent reason, then once who are on the register you can also apply for a postal vote:

https://www.yourvotematters.co.uk/how-do-i-vote/voting-by-post

or appoint someone to vote on your behalf (a proxy vote):

https://www.yourvotematters.co.uk/how-do-i-vote/voting-by-proxy

Got 5? Register to vote in the 2019 local elections!”

https://www.markpack.org.uk/8456/how-to-register-to-vote/?goal=0_8f22492d8e-73a05f74d3-312639877

“Revealed: Wife of former Vladimir Putin minister is major Tory party donor”

“The Conservative Party received hundreds of thousands from a woman with ties to the Russian president.

The Conservatives received almost £250,000 in donations last year from the wife of a former minister in Vladimir Putin’s government, new figures revealed. Lubov Chernukhin, whose ex-deputy finance minister husband Vladimir fell out with the Kremlin, is among the most generous donors to Tory coffers. She handed over £146,750 in November and December in addition to £100,000 earlier in the year.

The party also accepted £150,000 from Ann Said, whose Syrina-born husband, Wafic, is a former broker of arms deals with links to Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

Tory donors

The biggest gift to the Tories in the fourth quarter was £1.5 million from musical theatre producer John Gore, a regular donor to the party.

The Construction vehicle manufacturer JCB handed over £666,667, while the former Tory treasurer Michael Spencer’s IPGL donated £506,188.
The figures emerged in figures from the Electoral Commission covering the final three months of 2018.

Jon Trickett, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, said: “These figures reveal a party paid for by the rich and powerful, with apparent links to repressive regimes, tax avoiders and arms dealers.

“The influence of big money diminishes our democracy and reminds people that even if you have a vote, your voice will still be drowned out.”

A Conservative spokesperson said: “The Conservative Party does not accept foreign donations – as they are illegal. If a British citizen is able to vote in an election for a political party, they also have the democratic right to donate to a political party.

“All donations to the Conservative Party are received in good faith, after appropriate due diligence. Donations are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission, published by them, and comply fully with the law.”

Party funding

In the final quarter of 2018, the Conservatives received far more in donations than other parties, taking in almost £7.4m, more than four times the amount collected by Labour.

Jeremy Corbyn’s party took in £1.6m in donations during the three months, including a £490,300 gift from the Unite union.

Labour’s income from donations was outstripped by the £2,131,978 it received from public funds, much of it taxpayer-funded “Short money” to help opposition parties fund their work in the Commons.

The Liberal Democrats received £950,272 in donations and £249,937 from the public purse.

The Scottish National Party received £15,240 in gifts from three donors and £197,772 from public funds.

Greens took in £73,870 in donations and £27,611 from public funds, while Plaid Cymru had one donation of £10,722 and £24,928 in public funds. The UK Independence Party received just £13,000 in donations.

Over the course of 2018 Conservatives took donations totalling more than £21m, compared with less than £7m for Labour and £2.8m for the Lib Dems.

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/who-funds-conservative-party-donor-russia-vladimir-putin-link/

“MP accuses former Tory official of being a ‘fraudster’ and ‘cowboy’ who exploited legal loophole to hide source of ‘dark money’ “

“The Scottish Tory vice chair Richard Cook, who helped channel £435,000 to the Democratic Unionist Party was branded a “fraudster” and “cowboy” who deliberately masked “cancerous dark money” pumped into British politics ahead of the Brexit referendum.

In a Westminster Hall debate, the SNP MP Martin Docherty-Hughes called for an urgent review of current laws which allowed Cook, the chair of the Glasgow-based Constitutional Research Council (CRC) to exploit a legal loophole and avoid publicly stating the source of the record donation to the DUP.

The CRC is legally defined as an unincorporated association, permitted to donate money to political parties, campaigns and individuals in elective office.

Opposite of open democracy

Although the Constitution minister, Chloe Smith, told the debate that responsibility for unincorporated associations lay with the Electoral Commission, and that data held by them was a “treasure trove of information”, Docherty-Hughes said the way the DUP donation was organised was “the exact opposite of open, properly-functioning parliamentary democracy.” He questioned whether anyone in the DUP knew the source of the cash that was largely used to fund pro-leave campaigning on the UK mainland, and whether any “requisite due diligence” was done ahead of the money being accepted.

Under previous Northern Ireland electoral laws, donations to any of the major political parties were protected. The exact origins of £435,000 could have been revealed if the government had honoured its promise last year to back-date legal changes to the time of the 2016 referendum. This did not happen.

Poster boy to cowboy

Doherty-Hughes said Cook, a Tory candidate in the 2010 general election in East Renfrewshire, who had been photographed alongside the former prime minister, David Cameron, and with the current leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Ruth Davidson was “a poster boy for the way in which unincorporated associations have been used to funnel vast swathes of dark money into our political process.” …”

https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/james-cusick/mp-accuses-former-tory-official-of-being-fraudster-and-cowboy-who-exploite

Improving standards in public life (hint: a good few of our councillors fail the suggested tests!)

“On 30 January 2019, the Committee on Standards in Public Life published its long-awaited report on local government ethical standards, reflecting evidence obtained via a consultation exercise carried out from January-May 2018.

The report makes 26 recommendations.

Below we highlight the top five that will be of interest to local authorities, in particular to monitoring officers.

Some of the recommendations could be implemented quickly without the need for primary legislation – most important of these is the recommendation concerning amendments to registrable interests.The wide-ranging report, which runs to over 100 pages, finds that while the majority of councillors and officers maintain high standards of conduct, there is clear evidence of misconduct by some – mostly bullying, harassment or other disruptive behaviour. The report also raises concerns about risks to standards under the current rules governing declaring interests, gifts and hospitality.

The report provides an excellent review of the current framework governing the behaviour of local government councillors and executives in England and then makes a number of recommendations to promote and maintain the standards expected by the public. While it identifies numerous points of best practice, it makes 26 separate recommendations for improvement.

Top five recommendations

The top five recommendations, likely to be of most interest to those in local government, are:

Updating the model code and extending it to parish councils: the report finds considerable variation in the length, quality and clarity of local authority codes of conduct. It therefore recommends enhancing quality and consistency by requiring the Local Government Association to create an updated model code. In a bid to help ease the burden on principal authorities (who must investigate code breaches by parish councillors), the report also recommends requiring parish councils to adopt the code of conduct of their principal authorities or the new model code.

Presumption of official capacity: perhaps the most arresting suggestion, the report recommends combatting poor behaviour by presuming councillors to act in an official capacity in their public conduct, including statements made on publicly-accessible social media. This arises from the perennial concern that the current understanding of public and private capacity is too narrow, undermining public confidence.

Extending the list of registrable interests: the report considers that current arrangements for declaring councillors’ interests are too narrow and do not meet public expectations, so it suggests refining the arrangements for declaring and managing interests, including extending the list of registrable interests to include two categories of non-pecuniary interest:

(1) relevant unpaid commercial interests such as unpaid directorships; and

(2) trusteeship or membership of organisations that seek to influence opinion or public policy. As this does not require primary legislation to be implemented, this is one recommendation which may soon be acted upon. We are particularly pleased to see written evidence submitted by members of Cornerstone Barristers was cited in relation to recommendation (iii): see more below.

A new “objective” test for when councillors must withdraw or not vote:

monitoring officers will be particularly interested in the discussion in the report about the need to update the test for when councillors are forbidden from voting or participating in discussion on matters in which they have an interest.

The report recommends the test be overhauled and that councillors be required to refrain from voting or withdraw whenever they have any interest at all – whether registered or not – that a member of the public would reasonably regard as so significant as to likely prejudice the councillor’s decision-making.

Strengthening the sanctions system:

the report considers the current sanctions insufficient and so recommends allowing local authorities to suspend councillors without allowances for up to six months, with suspended councillors enjoying a right of appeal to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman for investigation and a binding decision on the matter.

Other conclusions and recommendations

The report further concludes that there is no need for a centralised body to govern and adjudicate on standards and that various benefits exist to local authorities maintaining their responsibility for implanting and applying the Seven Principles of Public Life.

A number of other recommendations are likely to be of interest, including:

Assisting local authority monitoring officers, the “lynchpin of the arrangements for upholding ethical standards” (p 81), by extending disciplinary protections and offering additional training for the statutory officers who support them.

Giving local authorities a discretionary power to establish a standards committee to advise on standards issues and decide on alleged breaches and/or sanctions for breaching the code of conduct.

Abolishing the current criminal offences in the Localism Act 2011 relating to disclosable pecuniary interests, which are said to be disproportionate in principle and ineffective in practice.

Requiring local authorities to take a range of steps to prevent and manage conflicts of interest that can arise when decisions are made in more complex and potentially less transparent contexts such as Local Enterprise Partnerships and joint ventures.

Fostering an ethical culture and practice by requiring councillors to attend formal induction training by their political groups, with national parties adding the same requirement to their model group rules.

The report recognises that many of its recommendations would require primary legislation and therefore be subject to parliamentary timetabling. The remaining recommendations – in particular those relating to registrable interests (as mentioned above), statutory officers and formal training for councillors – could however be implemented relatively quickly.

The Committee intends to monitor the uptake of its suggestions in 2020.”

Robin Green, Estelle Dehon and Dr Alex Williams, all members of the Cornerstone Planning and Government teams, submitted written evidence item 281 to the committee. Their evidence was cited at p 45 of the report in relation to recommendation (iii) above, on registrable interests.

Robin and Estelle are also contributors to Cornerstone on Councillors’ Conduct (Bloombsury Professional, 2015), which identifies and explains the law following the changes implemented by the Localism Act 2011 in relation to the standards system governing the conduct of elected members in local government.”

https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/governance/314-governance-a-risk-articles/39908-improving-ethical-standards

“COUNCIL TO BORROW £200 MILLION FOR PROPERTY SPECULATION – CHIEF EXECUTIVE BARS COUNCILLORS FROM TALKING ABOUT IT

East Devon District Council is controversially set to borrow £200 million to purchase property. The Council Cabinet agreed its Commercial Investment Framework, which would allow it to do so, on 6 February.

However many EDDC councillors have great concerns about this strategy. As a result, a Notice of Motion (NoM) was tabled by Councillor Roger Giles (Independent – Ottery Town) to be debated at the EDDC full council meeting on 27 February. The NoM was submitted in time, and was supported by more than the required number of other councillors.

However the EDDC Chief Executive Mark Williams struck the NoM off the agenda, on the grounds that the matter had already been discussed at the Cabinet meeting on 6 February.

“The EDDC Cabinet consists of just 10 councillors, and is Conservative controlled” said Roger Giles.

“The investment strategy would massively increase the council`s indebtedness, and is inherently risky. I therefore considered it essential that the whole council should be able to have a full-scale debate, and vote on the strategy.”

“However the Chief Executive has intervened to ban my NoM from being included on the agenda paper. By doing so I believe he has damaged our democratic processes – an action which is deeply regrettable.”

Lib Dems will not contest seats of Independents who have left other parties – so what about Claire Wright?

Sir Vince Cable has said that Lib Dems will NOT contest seats of the (so far 11) MPs who have broken from their parties to become independent in the last few days

Owl assumes that Sir Vince includes Claire Wright – the most popular independent in the country – in this sensible decision, especially as polling shows she could unseat Hugo Swire this time round.

Looking forward to Sir Vince’s confirmation.

Labour to offer councils direct access to Westminster

“Labour has announced proposals for a new representative body for councils to give them a regular voice at Westminster and a direct say on policy.

Andrew Gwynne, the shadow communities and local government secretary, will set out the plans for a local government commission, made up of leaders from all types of local authority.

Under Labour, the representatives would meet every month with the communities secretary and other cabinet ministers and “inform decision-making”, Gwynne will say in a speech to the Local Government Association (LGA) conference in Warwick.

Labour said the current communities secretary, James Brokenshire, had met directly with just one council in April to June last year, the last three months for which records were available.

There have been significant cuts to central grants for councils since 2010, and the LGA says its members are facing a funding gap of £3.2bn in the next financial year.

In his speech, Gwynne will argue that councils are hugely neglected by the centre of government, all the more so given that a Labour calculation found that 44% of the commitments in it 2017 manifesto would have fallen directly or indirectly to local authorities in England to implement.

He will say: “For nine years, ministers have sat in meetings in Whitehall and cut funding to councils hundreds of miles away, never having to see the library that is closed, the potholes that go unfixed and the elderly people that go without care as a result.

“To fix our broken political system which has left people disconnected and disillusioned with Westminster politics, we need to put local people and communities at the heart of decision-making.”

The new commission would “ensure that councillors can influence every decision that affects local councils”, he will say. “We need their guidance, your support and your advice, in ensuring that from Whitehall to our town halls we are being as effective as possible in helping our hardworking communities. Gone will be the days when we have a secretary of state for local government that doesn’t want to know local government.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/09/labour-unveils-plan-to-give-voice-to-neglected-councils

Ottery Town Council (particularly Councillor Carter) makes itself a laughing stock (again)

Owl says: It is well-known that Councillor Carter (one of the Greendale Carters) has no love for independent councillors!

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/11/07/majority-of-ottery-town-council-remarkably-unconcerned-about-the-future-of-their-hospital/

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/02/08/decision-overturned-to-set-up-ottery-hospital-working-group/

From the blog of Independent Councillor Claire Wright:

“Ottery St Mary Town Council revisited the contentious issue of whether it should support setting up a group to ensure the future of Ottery Hospital at yet another fraught meeting on Monday 4 February.

A bit of background information – at the town council meeting on 6 November a similar proposal was agreed by three votes to nil. Subsequently the town council abstainers (who thought that they had won) called for an extraordinary town council meeting to overturn the decision, which took place on 29 November.

Subsequently it became known that two members of the Health and Care Forum had established a limited company whose purpose is unclear.

I still find it hard to believe that a proposal to set up a working group to help retain the hospital, by a councillor – Geoff Pratt, who was asked as to help by the Health and Care Team Chair, has resulted in a bitter row lasting four months.

Our offer of help has been sullied, dragged through the dirt and subject to chicanery by political opponents who appear to be engaging in some kind of strange game of cat and mouse. I have been insulted on social media and mine and the town’s residents continued efforts over the years to retain the hospital and its beds have been rudely ridiculed and dismissed.

Myself and Dr Margaret Hall, who was also subject to unpleasantness, have both pulled out of any potential group as a result. It was difficult to believe the level of vitriol from a minority of people.

On Monday evening the town council finally agreed to meet with the hospital League of Friends Chair, Adrian Rutter, who came across as the voice of reason on Monday evening. However, as soon as the row seemed to abate, Cllr Paul Carter bizarrely decided to reignite it by insinuating that our offer of help was a bid to cause trouble.

One councillor announced that she didn’t think Mr Rutter should be allowed to speak as he hadn’t asked to do so at the beginning of the meeting!

Cllr Carter then accused me of smirking (I was doing anything but smirking!) and the mayor refused to let me respond. I did, however, manage to ask Cllr Carter why he was trying to reignite the row again.

Once again there were raised tempers, including from members of the public. One of whom told me afterwards it was one of the worst town council meetings he had ever attended.

It was not very clear what was agreed, but I believe the town council deferred a decision to establish the working group.”

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/ottery_town_council_to_meet_with_league_of_friends_chairman