To submit the report of the Monitoring Officer (attached).
Minutes:
Submitted – the report of the Monitoring Officer requesting that the
committee considered and made a decision on two applications for dispensation
from members of Bethesda Community Council in relation to discussions regarding
the transfer of local halls from the ownership of Gwynedd Council to the
ownership of the Community Council (or other community body).
Details were given on the applications individually, namely:-
·
An application from Councillor
Godfrey Northam, who was the Committee Chairman of Canolfan Rachub and a member of
the Committee of Canolfan Cefnfaes,
for permission to speak only when the matter would be discussed.
·
An application from Councillor
Walter Watkin Williams, who was a member of the Committee of Canolfan Cefnfaes, for permission
to speak and vote when the matter would be discussed.
The Monitoring Officer noted further:-
·
That neither of the members had been
appointed on the committees in question by the Community Council.
·
That the Standards Committee was
entitled to grant a dispensation provided that the situation fell under one (or
more) of the grounds listed in the relevant regulations and that there was no
reason to believe that the two applications in question did not meet the final
ground on the list, namely "the
business relates to the finances or property of a voluntary organisation of
whose management committee or board I am a member and I have no other
interest.”
·
That the fact that the applications
met this ground did not mean that the dispensation would be granted automatically
and the committee had to consider whether or not there was a public interest
from allowing the members to participate, despite the fact that the Code of
Conduct made provisions that they should not be able to do so.
·
That it was unclear in both cases why
these two specific members needed to speak on the matter. Councillor Northam felt that he had to participate in order to ensure
that the Community Council fully understood the situation regarding the village
hall; however, someone else could explain that. Councillor Northam
had also noted on his form that 4 out of 13 members on the Community Council
had to declare an interest in the matter; however, that would not affect
quorum.
·
Should these applications be
approved then the committee would have to approve other similar applications in
the future, and without any information regarding why the need to speak
justified the granting of a dispensation, it was difficult to know what
precedent was being created.
The members agreed with the observations of the Monitoring Officer and
noted that the information was patchy and vague and that the committee was
unaware of the exact reasons why these applications had been submitted.
It was noted further that this committee could be inundated with similar
applications as many community councils were currently discussing the transfer
of assets and it was suggested that it would be beneficial to prepare and
advice note for the clerks that provided an outline of the expectations. The
Monitoring Officer replied that a series of courses for clerks and community
council members were commencing that night and that this matter could be raised
there.
RESOLVED to refuse
both applications for a dispensation based on the lack of information.
Supporting documents: