Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting of the Local Hearing Sub-Committee and introduced each person present. 

The Chair outlined the purpose of the Hearing and explained the process that would be followed. 

The Investigating Officer and Councillors Scambler and Berry all confirmed that they were in agreement that the hearings in relation to allegation two against the two Councillors be heard together by the Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee therefore RESOLVED to hear the two cases together.

The Sub-Committee RESOLVED (on ground 7C) to exclude the public from the hearing at such times when they were deliberating to reach a finding on the matters before them.

No apologies for absence were submitted.

Members of the Committee are reminded of their responsibility to declare any personal interest in respect of matters contained in this agenda in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2000, the Council’s Constitution and the Members Code of Conduct.  If the personal interest is a prejudicial interest, then the individual Member should not participate in a discussion on the matter and must withdraw from the room and not seek to influence a decision on the matter.

None of the Sub-Committee Members declared any interest in relation to matters under consideration at the meeting.

To consider and determine the report of an investigation under Section 59 of the Local Government Act 2000 by Andrew Docherty, Director of Customer, Democratic and Legal Services, Chorley Borough Council) into an allegation concerning Parish Councillor Richard Scambler and Parish Councillor Kathleen Berry (Wheelton Parish Council). 

The pre-hearing process summary and the report of the Investigating Officer is enclosed.  Some words have been omitted from the report of the Investigating Officer as exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1, 2, 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

The Chair noted that all of the parties had received the pre-hearing summary and the report of the Investigating Officer. 

The Sub-Committee noted that on 20^th July 2006 an Ethical Standards Officer (ESO) of the Standards Board for England referred for local investigation allegations made against Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry

The allegations were:

1.      Councillor Richard Scambler failed to record in the Council’s register of interests his ownership of a plot of land adjoining a local sand quarry.

2.      Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry (who are brother and sister) participated in discussions and decisions about the quarry at a meeting of the Parish Council held on 5^th June 2006 without declaring their interests.

3.      Councillors Kathleen Berry and Richard Scambler used their position improperly to secure a disadvantage for the owner of the quarry in question.

The investigation was conducted by Mr Andrew Docherty, Director of Customer, Democratic and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer of Chorley Borough Council (Investigating Officer). The Investigating Officer submitted his final report dated 8^th January 2007 to the Standards Committee – Local Hearings Sub-Committee for its consideration.

To make the findings of fact. 

The following facts in the Investigating Officer’s report were undisputed:

Allegation One:

The “pink land” is not in the area of Wheelton Parish Council

The “pink land” is owned by Councillor Scambler’s mother.

Councillor Scambler does not have a beneficial interest in the “pink land”.

Allegation Two:

The land is not within Wheelton Parish.

There is no real possibility of a vehicular access being created to the quarry across the pink land and it has no separate development value.

The pink land has never been part of the quarry land. Although people have walked across the pink land to get to the quarry site, there is no public right of way and there is now a fence separating the land from the quarry.

Councillor Scambler believed he had as much as anyone to contribute to the debate. Having a farming background he understands the amount of work that will be required to drain and level land to create usable pitches.

Allegation Three:

The Wheelton Parish Council invited a member of the public to advise it in relation to the sand quarry.

That member of the public was in dispute with the current owner of the quarry.

The following facts in the Investigating Officer’s report were disputed:

Allegation One:

None.

Allegation Two:

“7.10         It is the wish of the Parish Council that the land should be used to a greater extent than it is currently. It is very likely that increased use of the land would lead to an increase in use of the paths across the pink land. Mrs Scambler would either have to take active steps to control the use or accept the use. If she accepted the use she would either have to accept that the paths would become dedicated eventually as public rights of way or take steps to prevent that happening. As the landowner she would owe legal duties to those coming on to her land. While the burden of those duties might still be light they would clearly be greater the more the land is used. The Investigating Officer does not suggest that any of this would be especially burdensome but, taking the broad interpretation of well being that the case law and guidance suggests, he does think that it is enough to suggest that her well being would be affected to a degree.”

Councillors Scambler and Berry’s reasons for disagreeing with paragraph 7.10 of the Investigating Officer’s report are “As there are no officially designated footpaths on the land this would not produce a burden on Mrs Scambler”.

Councillors Scambler and Berry suggestion that paragraph 7.10 should read “This would not produce a burden on Mrs Scambler as there are no footpaths for access on the “pink land”.

Whether there was a need to declare an interest given that the land is not in Heapey Parish.

Allegation Three:

None.

Written evidence

The Sub-Committee considered Councillors Scambler and Berry’s written response to the evidence set out in the Investigating Officer’s Report set out on Form  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4a

To determine whether there has been a breach of the Code of Conduct. 

Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry both conceded that they had inadvertently breached paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct as alleged in allegation 2.

The relevant sections of the Code of Conduct are:

Paragraph 7

"A member must regard himself as having a personal interest in any matter if the matter relates to an interest in respect of which notification must be given under paragraphs 12 and 13 of the Code, or if a decision upon it might reasonably be regarded as affecting to a greater extent than other Council Tax payers, ratepayers, or inhabitants of the authority's area, the well-being or financial position of himself, a relative or friend or……”

Paragraph 8

"A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.”

Paragraph 9

"A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgement of the public interest".

Paragraph 10

"A member with a prejudicial interest in any matter must –

(a)  withdraw from the room or chamber where a meeting is being held whenever it becomes apparent that the matter is being considered at that meeting, unless he has obtained a dispensation from the standards committee of the responsible authority, and

(b)  not seek improperly to influence a decision about that matter".

Paragraph 5

“A member - must not in his official capacity, or any other circumstance, use his position as a member improperly to confer on or secure for himself or any other person, an advantage or disadvantage."

Paragraph 12(f):

“A member must register his financial interests [including] the address or other description ... of any land in which he has a beneficial interest and which is in the area of the authority.”

The Standards Committee – Local Hearing Sub-Committee decided that Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry had failed to comply with paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct as alleged in allegation 2.

Summary of submissions by Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry:

·                    They accepted that they had inadvertently failed to comply with the Code of Conduct

·                    They had written a letter to the Standards Board for England to say that they were disappointed that a complaint had been made when the breach was inadvertent

·                    They accepted that the Investigating Officer had been very fair with them and had fully co-operated with his investigation

·                    Because the failure to comply with the Code of Conduct was inadvertent they suggested that there should be no penalty imposed for their breach of the Code.

Summary of submissions by the Investigating Officer:

·                    The fact that the Standards Board  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4b

To confirm the decision of the Local Hearing Sub-Committee.

The Standards Committee – Local Hearing Sub-Committee reached the following decision after carefully considering the written evidence and submissions of the parties.

RESOLVED – That Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry shall both be censured and both required to send a written apology to the Clerk of Wheelton Parish Council in respect of their failure to comply with paragraph 8 of the Members Code of Conduct.

The above penalties will take effect from the date of the decision, namely, 20^th March 2007.

The Standards Committee – Local Hearing Sub-Committee decided to impose the above penalties because:

·                    The Sub-Committee accepted that Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry’s failure to comply with the Code of Conduct was made unknowingly and without malice

·                    The Sub-Committee accepted that there was no financial impropriety on the part of Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry

·                    There was clearly a lack of awareness on the part of Councillors Richard Scambler and Kathleen Berry

·                    The Sub-Committee noted that Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry had co-operated fully with the investigation

·                    All the facts of the case show Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry’s failure to comply with the Code of Conduct to be at the lower end of seriousness

·                    Although Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry’s failure to comply with the Code of Conduct was inadvertent the Sub-Committee concluded that there is a duty on all Councillors to make themselves aware of and understand the provisions of the Members Code of Conduct.

·                    The Standards Committee – Local Hearing Sub-Committee therefore considered that the penalty imposed was appropriate.

Right to Appeal

Councillor Richard Scambler and Councillor Kathleen Berry have the right to apply in writing to the President of the Adjudication Panel for England for permission to appeal the Standards Committee’s finding.  Written notice requesting permission to appeal must be received by the President of the Adjudication Panel within 21 days of the Member’s receipt of notification of the Standards Committee’s finding.

Recommendations to the Authority

The Standards Committee – Local Hearings Sub-Committee made no recommendations in relation to the promotion and maintenance of high standards of conduct by the Members of the Wheelton Parish Council.