General Discussion
Hi Lynne - thanks for the info. I'm trying to keep up but you have a much better handle on this than me. 1. I'm not confusing pecuniary interest with predetermination but I might be confusing it with Register of Interests. I don't know the nuances but I was observing that his rental of the land has been declared, and if it is Option 4 land then an automatic pecuniary interest must surely ...
There's no conjecture - Cllr Clemens has declared a pecuniary interest. Lynne are you sure it's the same land as Option 4? Were the SANGS options put to a vote of the TDC Planning Committee? Is/was the housing land and the nearby Option 2 land in the same ownership? And a propos of what was being discussed a few days ago: ...
Sounds like a politician's answe SoD. Can you give a straight answer - are you a LibDem candidate? Also, as 'SoulofDawlish' are you saying you are posting as a group or as an individual?
That's very amusing. I wonder what the verdict is now. Actually Gregory Fenne is standing, as is Angela Fenne of the same address. All these double acts, do Town Council meetings coincide with date night or something?
'Beware of any b/s about having to listen to arguments'. Lynne, if you look at guidance notes about predetermination you will see that is precisely what councillors should be saying. Predisposed yes, predetermined no. Tread carefully or your quest for certainty could backfire on Mr Weeks in the long run.
Thanks for the background. I do think it's risky trying to second guess pecuniary interest or predetermination but either way, if it does come down to CPO or legal challenges on predetermination, it will be a long ride.
Michael, it was before I moved to Dawlish but didn't I read that you were motivated to become a councillor because you were horrified at the prospect of the Manor being sold off by the council? How is that different? Sorry if I'm completely mistaken about that.
See Page 5 of the summary. Has this been superseded? https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/5959/1896534.pdf
That's interesting Michael I wasn't even aware of it. However more reading up leads me to wonder if the issue of predetermination has been modified: http://www.localism-agenda.com/2012/01/abolishing-predetermination-what-it-really-means/
But if they're not pro Richard's cause, wouldn't that be good for him - fewer votes against him? Or maybe this clause would be relevant to obtaining a dispensation to vote: without the dispensation the representation of different political groups dealing with that business would be so upset as to alter the likely outcome of any vote,
