5 June 2021
Follow me @Linda Derrick1
Facebook Linda Derrick for Ridgeway East
Day 8 and I was all prepared for my first meeting. I was well wrapped up against the rain and cold under a canopy in the parish council’s garden. I had even (just about) read all the papers.
But I’m afraid, at my very first meeting, I had to vote against pretty well every motion on the agenda. Pity really, as it doesn’t endear you to other councillors.
But councillors are required to exercise their independent judgement. So I did.
Even so, I got little thanks for pointing out that the asset register, which we were asked to approve, didn’t have any land assets included. It surprised me that no-one else spotted the omission.
One of the councillors suggested that this didn’t matter as the Council proposed to transfer some of the land anyway. Another suggested it didn’t matter as the land was notionally valued at £1 per piece of land and shouldn’t be included.
My independent judgement told me that it was a legal requirement for the Council to approve the asset register and that approval should be taken seriously. I thought the substantial areas of land owned by the Council were important assets whether they were to be transferred or not. And I decided I should have the complete register in front of me when being asked to approve it as part of the statutory process. So I maintained we needed to approve the complete register.
The Council eventually agreed that an Extraordinary Meeting would have to be convened to specifically approve the asset register. I did say exercising independent judgement doesn’t endear you to your colleagues.
There were also a number of resolutions to approve, all part of the statutory obligations on councils. We were asked to approve last year’s financial accounts, the transfer of surplus funds into the reserves, and the Annual Governance and Accountability Return for 2120/21.
I voted against all of these motions and asked for my votes to be recorded. I also asked for my reasons for voting against the resolutions to be recorded and the Council agreed. And I then gave my reasons. Here for example is the reason I gave for voting against the Governance and Accountability Return:-
“First, I believed the Council had acted unlawfully when co-opting councillors from Jan 2020; the legal advice to Council on this issue was based on incorrect information provided by the then Clerk.
Second, I believed that Council had not complied with the law in its actions in the transfer of land to Hughenden Community Support Trust.”
Now you may have thought that other councillors would have been interested in my reasons. If another councillor had voted against last year’s financial accounts or the Annual Governance and Accountability Return, I would have been concerned and asked questions. But when I voted against and gave my reasons, no- one commented, no-one asked questions and no-one challenged what I said.
Mind you, it was pretty cold by then and the rain was hammering down.
After the meeting, I provided the Clerk with the text of what I had said for the minutes. I was concerned that, what with the noise of the rain, I might not have been audible.
When the draft minutes came out, I noticed that all of my reasons had been included except for one phrase – that “the legal advice to Council was based on incorrect information provided by the then Clerk”.
And I remembered what Debra Main had said when she decided in April not to stand again for the Council. She referred to getting things recorded in the minutes as a “kind of battle”.
And this is when I found out what she meant.
I wrote to the Clerk and asked that the phrase be included in the draft minutes. One of the other councillors disagreed saying:-
“It is a significant slur on the competence of the Clerk at the time, without evidence the Council should not be seen to formalise such an assertion in its records”.
And I thought, really – this is not an assertion, this is a fact. So I responded saying:
“The minutes of a meeting are intended to record what was said and not what others at the meeting think should have been said or not. I said what I said and it should be recorded.
It was open to anyone at the time to have disagreed with me…
I have documentary evidence of the facts I related, including documentary evidence that the [ then Clerk] agreed that that the information she provided to the solicitors was inaccurate.”
The Clerk responded to say the minutes of a meeting are formal records of official acts and decisions. Reasons for voting are not required to be included. So I pointed out that Council had agreed that my reasons should be recorded and I was merely asking that they be recorded accurately.
Naturally, when we got to the Extraordinary Meeting of the Council, I asked for my amendment to the minutes.
Again I was told, by two councillors, that the Council did not have to record the reasons for voting. I pointed out again that, in this case, Council had agreed to record my reasons; all I was asking was that they were recorded accurately.
I added that I had prepared my reasons beforehand and had read them out at the meeting so I was absolutely sure what I had said.
At which point, it all got a bit surreal. The Chairman said that if I had prepared a text of my reasons before the meeting, this made it a case of “pre-determination”. I have no idea why this was case of “pre-determination” – nor, even if it was, why only one small clause in my reasons should be excluded.
I asked the Clerk if she could send me the guidance on pre-determination and I received it this morning.
It says “ Councillors are entitled to have a predisposition one way or another as long as they have not pre-determined the outcome. Councillors are able to express an opinion providing they come to the meeting with an open mind, able to take account of all the evidence and make their decision on the day”.
Well, in preparing my statement beforehand I was certainly predisposed but I then was entitled to be. However, I also came to the meeting with an open mind. I would have welcomed a discussion on my reasons in Full Council. But no-one said anything. No-one provided any evidence for me to take account of. So, this can’t be predetermination – can it?
Of course, Council voted not to include my amendment. But I suspect more people will read this blog, containing my complete reason, than the Council minutes, with the incomplete version.
But what a waste of time and energy which could have been used to do something for the good of the community.
Hey ho. The next blog is about the Extraordinary Meeting – and it certainly lived up to its name.
P.S. There are still vacancies on the Council. If anyone would like to join, the deadline is 23 June. You never know, you might enjoy it.
Comments