Agenda and minutes

In the absence of the Chairman Councillor Thynne, the Vice-Chairman, Councillor Mace took the chair.

Minutes of meeting held on 18^th September  2017 (previously circulated). 

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 18^th September 2017 were agreed as a correct record.

There were no items of urgent business.

To receive declarations by Members of interests in respect of items on this Agenda. 

Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Localism Act 2011, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests. (It is a criminal offence not to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest either in the Register or at the meeting). 

Whilst not a legal requirement, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9 and in the interests of clarity and transparency, Members should declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared in the Register, at this point in the meeting. 

In accordance with Part B Section 2 of the Code Of Conduct, Members are required to declare the existence and nature of any other interests as defined in paragraphs 8(1) or 9(2) of the Code of Conduct. 

Councillor Barry declared an interest in Item 11 in view of him being an Emeritus Lecturer at Lancaster University.

Report of the Monitoring Officer

The Monitoring Officer presented a report to enable the Committee to consider requests from Councillors Leyshon and Whitehead for a dispensation under section 33 of the Localism Act in order for them, as executive members to participate in forthcoming discussions of the Canal Corridor North project.

The Committee considered the applications separately.  Councillor Whitehead had applied for a dispensation in view of her being an Emeritus Professor at Lancaster University and in receipt of a pension.  It was noted that the declaration of pecuniary interest form which members completed did not mention a pension as being a DPI and the Committee were in agreement that Councillor Whitehead’s interest was not a disclosable pecuniary interest and consequently she did not require a dispensation.  

The Committee then considered Councillor Leyshon’s request as an employee of Lancaster University.  It was noted Councillor Leyshon was one of a number of councillors who would have an interest in the Canal Corridor North project and since Council would be making the decision and not Cabinet, granting of a dispensation on this occasion was not considered essential to the functioning of Cabinet.  The Localism Act was clear that dispensations should only be granted under limited circumstances and the Committee was not convinced that there was a case for a dispensation at this time.

Resolved:

(1)          That it is the view of the Standards Committee that Councillor Whitehead does not need to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest in the Canal Corridor North project and is therefore not in need of a dispensation.

(2)          That the Standards Committee is not minded to grant Councillor Leyshon a dispensation on the Canal Corridor North Project on the grounds that it is not essential for the functioning of Cabinet, and he is one of a number of Councillors that will have a disclosable interest in this issue.