MAJOR TOWN ISSUES
Dual-hatted councillors - conflict of interest anyone?
(December 11, 2010)
UNTIL last year different councils were responsible for unique
services and there was little or very few minor conflicts of interest
for local politicians who served on two or three different levels of
local government Wiltshire County Council, for example, was solely responsible for
schools. West Wiltshire District Council was responsible solely for
housing. Warminster Town Council was solely responsible for grants to the
Christmas lights. Other responsibilities were also very clearly defined.
Now that has all changed.
It has brought on a new phrase and phase of representation - that of the 'dual-hatted councillor'.
In Warminster three Wiltshire Council members are dual-hatted.
Should Warminster Town Council spend money on a hat with a
Crusader emblem on it to give their councillors who serve on the
Wiltshire Council when they have to declare an interest at County Hall?
Should Wiltshire Council supply a cap with a bustard emblem on it
when they have to declare an interest at their area board meeting or at
in Dewey House Town Council meetings?
One local authority wrote:
'It was considered that such dual-hatted members would have a prejudicial interest.'
Another wrote:
'It would be preferable for Councillors not to serve on Parish or Town Council’s planning committees.'
Another wrote:
'The complaint relates to a "dual hatted" member.'
Warminster town councillors are now responsible for
taking decisions about car parking charges which conflict with
Wiltshire Council and also whether or not to accept a bid from
Wiltshire Council to take over part of the Assembly Hall are two major
examples.
On other minor issues Wiltshire Council has minuted two more:
Chapel of St. Lawrence
Councillor Davis left the room for discussion and consideration of
this item.
Councillor Pip Ridout declared a prejudicial interest in Item 11,
specifically in relation to the Community Area Grant application
from the Warminster Christmas Lights Committee. Councillor
Ridout would leave the room for consideration of this item.
Is it time to ask whether three into two does not go?
Click here to return to the MAJOR TOWN ISSUES page
