What circumstances can prevent disqualification of a councillor after not attending council meetings for over 6 months?

Question

I am very grateful for the replies received so far.
It is now over 6 months since a particular councillor last attended a parish council meeting in person. They did attend an annual parish meeting within the last 6 months which I understand does not count as a parish council meeting. For most of the meetings they did not attend, they submitted apologies which were accepted by the council by a majority vote. Some councillors did not accept the apologies that were submitted which stated either 'on holiday' or 'other commitment' because it was known that the absent councillor had moved permanenty to France and a 1,000 mile round trip for each council meetings was impractical.
Before the 6-month period of non-attendance was reached, the absent councillor did not submit a written request to the parish council for it to agree for their period of office to be extended. It, therefore, seems to me that this councillor can now be disqualified immediately and without warning. Is this correct?

Answer 1

The answer is in your question. If this councillor submitted an apology giving the reason which is then accepted by the council then the six month "qualifying period" starts again. If it is common knowledge that you say they are now resident abroad then why on earth are the council accepting their reason for non attendance. I don't think " I now live in France" as being an acceptable excuse and it also negates the conditions of being an elected councillor-does it not?

Answer 2

The local government act Section 85  says "attendance as representative of the authority at a meeting of any body of persons, shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1) above to be attendance at a meeting of the authority".   One could argue that the Annual Parish meeting comes within that definition.  Countering that,   The act says "he shall, unless the failure was due to some reason approved by the authority before the expiry of that period, cease to be a member of the authority".  Simply accepting an apology for absence does not waive the rule. A resolution would be needed before the 6 month deadline to recognise the absences would trigger section 85, agree that it should be waived and specifically define what "some reason" actually was.  On balance I think the cllr can get away with it for now, but the click starts ticking again the day after the annual parish meeting, & 6 months after that date, he has to go unless the council pass a resolution as defined above.

Comments

A Cllr is not 'summons' to attend an APM - they may attend as a member of public.  It would be a stretch to claim that attendance at an APM would qualify them as attending a council meeting since the APM is NOT a council meeting.

Is a parish councillor in attendance at an APM a 'representative' of the council any more or less than they are so when going about their daily business?  They cannot speak, act or define them self as attending the APM in an official council capacity other than they are a councillor.

Is a councillor attending an APM a 'representative' of the council?  They cannot be summons to attend and I'd suggest they carry no more, nor less, representative authority than any other person present and since they have no authority to speak / act on behalf of the council they cannot have a claim to being a representative of the council in that regard.

A rare unequivocal agreement with Mrs Abster below.  The simple means of avoiding this ambiguity over whether the clock re-starts with an accepted apology (what ever form that may take and how ever it may, or may not, be regarded, resolved and recorded by the clerk is simply to treat "apologies" as a courtesy and enter into the formal record those present and those absent.
After all, it would be a rare and exceptional circumstance which genuinely required a councillor to sustain a full 6 months absence and STILL think they are suited to the role.

---

As I pointed out, The local government act Section 85  says "attendance as representative of the authority at a meeting of any body of persons, shall be deemed for the purposes of subsection (1) above to be attendance at a meeting of the authority".  A meeting of any "body of persons" could be at a residents association etc and could include an annual meeting of the Parish.  The cllr could claim simply by attending that they are there as a representative of their Parish Council.  The Council could dispute it, and the monitoring officer of the principal authority may have to rule on it.

---

Of course, I read what you previously opined and don't dispute the content of the section.  It states "as a representative of the authority."  My query was - can a person who is also a Cllr claim to be a "representative" of the authority for the purpose of attending an APM where the authority has no authority at that meeting.  They are, to all intents and purposes, Joe Public who happens to be a Cllr - Personally, I wouldn't interpret that as being a "representative."  I guess its just one of those many issues which is, until adjudged one way or the other, open to interpretation (and question...)

Answer 3

....and this is the exact reason why my council formally resolved to not accept any apologies for any councillor regardless of their reason.  It means that the clock cannot restart towards the end of the 6-month period for another 6 months and that councillors actually attend and do the job that they signed up for...