New Ground & Local Elections

[rigsby]

ahh the old days when Billericay used to be one of the first to declare.
I knew Harveys agent, used to drink with his son, He used to refer to me as "that Pinko friend of yours"

Teresa Gorman wasn't a great deal of cop either.

Moonman was the last decent MP Bilericay had

Wasn't that the colour you could end up after an evening with Harvey.......Allegedly

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

This wouldn't constitute a material breach of that particular principle @Firestorm. As ever with legalities, interpretation is key as you rightly highlight. However, under the law where this has been tested previously the consensus is that 'an interest' means some kind of concrete stake; some kind of personal financial benefit or other material gain. I am unlucky enough to have direct personal experience of adjudicating on alleged abuses of office in the national policing area so I have pored over this with expert lawyers on a number of occasions!

What I have also seen all too often is for rules set down at a local level to often misinterpret risk to the extent of overcaution. But I would challenge these particular rules on the basis of comparable decisions such as those I mentioned above. When you get into the meat of the decision being taken, we can argue that everyone is a beneficiary and liking something or being a customer of one body or another does not in itself come close to constituting a material breach. Otherwise, nobody would ever be allowed to vote on anything as we would have to define everyone as inherently pro- or anti-! Both are equal and opposite interests, if we were to interpret the word that way.

 

[Firestorm]

"often misinterpret risk to the extent of overcaution"

That was my feeling ,
I am sure that we have had some councillors not allowed to vote on FF due to a conflict and I recall an councillor who was an Athletics club member not being allowed to vote on a couple of issues . Now this was 30 years ago so could it be that the council rules pre Nolan were more robust so were not changed in 1995 ?? (some may say more draconian...)


Or more than likely, I am mistaken and its ok for them to vote .......

 

[blue pilot]

My understanding is Councillors who are ST's would be barred from speaking/voting on any issues regarding the Club or Fosetts and would have to declare an 'interest.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

My understanding is Councillors who are ST's would be barred from speaking/voting on any issues regarding the Club or Fosetts and would have to declare an 'interest.

That does seem to be the case, according to some rules somewhere. However those rules need looking at, because it is plain wrongheaded.

 

[OldBlueLady]

That does seem to be the case, according to some rules somewhere. However those rules need looking at, because it is plain wrongheaded.

Agreed, as long as you have no financial interest then does it really matter if you support the local football team - which you probably should at least show an interest in as a local councillor?!

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Agreed, as long as you have no financial interest then does it really matter if you support the local football team - which you probably should at least show an interest in as a local councillor?!

Agreed, for me they should be banned from any part of SUFC planning decisions etc IF they are Spammers, Totterham or the like.