Agenda item

To receive an update from Councillor P Pennington.

With the permission of the Chair, the agenda was reorganised and the item regarding the dispensation request was brought forward and discussed after the confirmation of the minutes.

Councillor Johns entered the meeting at 10:03am

With agreement of the Chair, Councillor Pennington and his witness Sue Beer joined the Committee table and addressed the Committee regarding his Dispensation Request in relation to the X-Links Project. To start, Councillor Pennington advised Members of his prior dispensation request for Atlantic Array and noted the reports provided to Members via a supplement to the agenda.

Councillor Pennington advised the Committee about Sue Beer’s history with Littleham and Landcross Parish Council and the circumstances surrounding Atlantic Array. He then detailed his Council career thus far, the difficulties faced by changing boundaries, his role as a farmer, and briefed Members on his affected land.

Councillor Pennington argued that the result from the Standards Committee in 2013 has set precedent and told Members that he is not seeking dispensation because of pecuniary interest as the money received would only be to cover any losses incurred. He argued that the dispensation should be approved because as an elected Member he has the duty to represent his ward.

The Chair asked for clarification on the area of affected land, how it will be used, and how it will be maintained post construction. Councillor Pennington provided clarification and explained that X-Links would have an easement to access the land when needed. He then reiterated that any money received would be compensatory.

The item was then discussed.

Members were concerned about the amount of critical discussion Councillor Pennington would have missed if he were to be included in the working group at this late stage.

Members asked if the dispensation request was for inclusion within the Working Group as well as commentary at Full Council. Councillor Pennington advised that due to his knowledge of the area, the request was for both.

The Vice Chair stated that as the X-Links Project is a National Significant Infrastructure Project, Torridge District Council have little significance in decision making. He explained his concern that if Torridge District Council were to respond to a consultation, there could be allegations against the Council as a landowner could have had undue influence on said statement.

The Vice-Chair declared interest as a landowner.

Members advised that with the current timeline, it may be too late to make the representations that Councillor Pennington aims to.

Councillor Pennington stressed his worry that there is a lack of focus on those who are directly and consequentially impacted.

The Head of Legal and Governance (& Monitoring Officer) asked Councillor Pennington if he is receiving a sum of money from X-Links for the use of his land and the easement thereafter. Councillor Pennington explained that it is under negotiation, however his perception is that any money received is compensation. The Head of Legal and Governance (& Monitoring Officer) stated her concern that as X-Links will have a significant personal impact on Councillor Pennington, she questions whether he can independently represent the Torridge District.

Members highlighted the need to represent their wards, however questioned the benefits of granting dispensation.

Sue Beer commented that the Parish has trust in Councillor Pennington and as Littleham and Landcross will be significantly impacted, their opinions should be heard.

The Head of Legal and Governance (& Monitoring Officer) clarified the role of Councillors within the X-Links Working Group. She then explained that all Torridge District Councillors, although having their own wards are District Councillors who represent the Torridge District. She reiterated that any constituent can approach any Councillor in relation to any Torridge District Council matter.

Councillor James, citing his own personal experience proposed to refuse the dispensation. This was seconded by Councillor Gibson.

It was proposed by Councillor James, seconded by Councillor Gibson and –

Resolved:

That the Dispensation be refused.

(Vote: For – 4, Against – 1, Abstention – 2)

Councillor Pennington and Sue Beer left the meeting.

Members highlighted that constituents need to be advised on who they can contact. It was agreed that contact will be made with the Parish Clerks and this information will be provided.

The Head of Legal and Governance (& Monitoring Officer) gave Members more information on dispensation requests and advised that the process of declaring pecuniary interest is to protect Members from allegations.