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.
Minutes:
Members advised of the following interests at this stage:
Councillor Kay declared a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) in the report regarding a Review of Local Council Tax Charging for Empty Homes, in relation to an empty property in Lancaster owned by the local Labour Party. Councillor Clifford then declared an interest on behalf of all the members in the Labour Group in relation to the same empty property, informing the Mayor that they would leave the meeting when the item was considered, in accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Council Procedure Rule 9.1 (minute number 91 refers).
Councillor Cozler declared a DPI in relation to the report on the Localised Council Tax Support Scheme 2018/19 as a recipient of council tax support (minute number 90 refers).
Councillor Thynne declared a DPI in relation to the Local Plan item, as an employee of Lancaster University (minute number 88 refers).
Councillor Charles declared a DPI in relation to the Local Plan item (minute number 88 refers) and also, as a landlord, on the report regarding a Review of Local Council Tax Charging for Empty Homes (minute number 91 refers).
Councillor Sykes declared that she was a landlord and would therefore declare a DPI in the Review of Local Council Tax Charging for Empty Homes item (minute number 91 refers).
The Mayor also declared a DPI in relation to the Review of Local Council Tax Charging for Empty Homes item (minute number 91 refers), as a landlord.
In response to a question from Councillor Barry, the Monitoring Officer clarified why Members had been advised that landlords would have a DPI in relation to the Review of Local Council Tax Charging for Empty Homes item. She explained that a DPI existed because rental properties often had periods between lettings, or periods where refurbishment or repairs were necessary, and the property would be empty and subject to the Empty Homes charging policy adopted by Council.
Councillors Gardiner and Edwards declared personal interests in items 9 and 16, the Motion on Notice and Cabinet Minutes, as elected members of Lancashire County Council (minute numbers 88 and 95 refer).
Councillor Leyshon declared a DPI in relation to the Local Plan item, as an employee of Lancaster University (minute number 88 refers).
In relation to the Review of Local Council Tax Charging for Empty Homes item (minute number 91 refers), Councillor Caroline Jackson declared that her partner owned a property but that she was not a landlord herself.
Councillor Metcalfe asked for advice regarding the Local Plan item, as a Member whose partner worked at Lancaster University. The Monitoring Officer advised that this would not constitute a DPI in the item, as the report concerned a policy matter which was not specific to Lancaster University, however she was aware that some Members who were employed at Lancaster University felt that they had an interest and would absent themselves from the meeting for that item. The Monitoring Officer reminded Members that declarations of interest were a matter for each individual Councillor to decide for themselves; her role was to advise, not instruct.
Councillor Hamilton-Cox declared, in regard to the Review of Local Council Tax Charging for Empty Homes item (minute number 91 refers) that he was a landlord. However, he would be staying to participate in the matter, as he intended to propose more stringent penalties for landlords of empty properties which would offer him no advantage.