| Case no. | SBE-07588-R18QK |
| Member(s): | Councillor J Houldsworth |
| Date received: | 09 Oct 2009 |
The member brought his office or authority into disrepute, and failed to declare a personal and a prejudicial interest.
The ethical standards officer found that the member did not breach the Code of Conduct.
On 22 July 2008, Kensington Developments submitted an outline planning application for the large scale development of parts of the Marton Moss area of Blackpool. On 14 May 2009 they appealed to the planning inspectorate against the council’s non-determination of that application. On 3 June 2009, Kensington Developments submitted a further planning application to the council.
On 8 June 2009, the Council’s development control committee considered the first planning application because of the appeal. The committee was asked to say whether the application would have been rejected or approved if it had come before the committee for determination. Councillor Houldsworth was at the meeting and did not declare a personal or prejudicial interest in the application.
Councillor Houldsworth is a member of Blackpool South Conservative Association. The Association maintains a "fighting fund" account. Donations for the prospective parliamentary candidate were put in the fighting fund and were for the exclusive use of the parliamentary candidate's election expenses. No payments are made from the fighting fund to ward members or other candidates.
On 19 May 2008, Kensington Developments donated £5,000 made payable to Blackpool South Conservative Association. They sent the cheque to Councillor Ron Bell, prospective Conservative Party parliamentary candidate for the Blackpool South constituency. He presented it at a meeting of the Association on 20 May 2008 as a donation for his campaign. The donation was paid into the fighting fund account. Councillor Houldsworth remembered Councillor Bell presenting the £5,000 donation at the 20 May 2008 meeting. He said that he did not know who the donor was.
The Conservative Group members met on 17 September 2009 and 21 September 2009. No council officers were present at either meeting, and no present or future council business was discussed. On 17 September, Councillor Peter Callow, the Conservative Group Leader, asked the councillors present if they knew about two political donations to Blackpool South Conservative Association. At the end of the meeting on 21 September, a document was passed around the group members to sign. It stated:
“We the undersigned wish it to be known that we did not know that the two donations given to Blackpool South Conservative Association were from Kensington Developments Ltd”.
Councillor Houldsworth did not sign the document. He said that he was not aware that Kensington Developments was the donor until 11 August 2009 at a political group meeting. He said that he did not know the source of the donation when he participated in the development control committee meeting on 8 June 2009.
The ethical standards officer found that the donations were paid into the Association’s fighting fund account for the use of the prospective parliamentary candidate. There is no evidence that these donations were available to any ward candidates, ward members or other members of the Association. The ethical standards officer therefore considered that it was not necessary to resolve any conflicts in the evidence about whether Councillor Houldsworth was aware of source of the political donation when he participated in the development control committee meeting on 8 June 2009.
The ethical standards officer considered that the donations do not amount to an interest that Councillor Houldsworth was required to register. The development control meeting was not considering business which related to or was likely to affect the Association. The business under consideration was an application by Kensington Developments. Kensington Developments would be affected by any decision made by the committee but not the Conservative Association.
Councillor Houldsworth would have had a personal interest if the decision could have affected his well-being or financial position or that of a member of his family or someone else with whom Councillor Houldsworth has a close association, more than that of the majority of the Council’s ratepayers, taxpayers and inhabitants. The ethical standards officer found no evidence of this.
In the absence of a personal interest, it is not possible for Councillor Houldsworth to have had a prejudicial interest.
The ethical standards officer therefore considered that Councillor Houldsworth did not fail to comply with paragraph 12 of the Code of Conduct in respect of his conduct at the development control meeting.The allegations in this case relate to paragraphs 5, 9, and 12 of the Code of Conduct.
Paragraph 5 states that “you must not conduct yourself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing your office or authority into disrepute”.
Paragraph 9 states that “…where you have a personal interest in any business of your authority and you attend a meeting of your authority at which the business is considered, you must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest…”.
Paragraph 12 states that “…where you have a prejudicial interest in any business of your authority you must…withdraw from the room or chamber where a meeting considering the business is being held….”.