About casual vacany vs co-option

Question

My local Parish Council advertised for applicants for a vacancy and are vetting the four applicants via a closed online video meeting which purports to make a recommendation to the Parish Council as to their preferred applicant.  Is this within the 'rules' for a Casual Vacancy (which is how the post was advertised)?  Surely the names of the candidates and a ballot should be the 'right way'?

Answer 1

Just to be clear you are talking about a vacancy for a councillor. If so then there is no such thing as a casual vacancy it is an authorised ability to fill a vacancy via co-option. Your PC should have a co-option policy in place where the procedure should be set out to follow and should be open and transparent in all its requirements being shown to the community via the website and minited agenda item. It should be subject to a council vote if more than one candidate is applying and advisable that the vote should be a written vote not a show of hands.

Comments

Why do you express a preference for written vote rather than show of hands?

Is it so that a correct and auditable record is made or is it so that Cllrs do not have to 'show' how they voted?

If it is for record then a named vote recorded in the minutes would be the better option but if your point is to suggest that Cllrs should not be expected to show how they voted that is the only conceivable advantage of a written vote.

A Cllr that is not prepared to show their voting stance on any given subject is a sham in my book...

---

The basis is that if the vote is written then no one knows who supported and who was against the person up for co-option. Thereby avoiding someone joining the council with pre-conceived ideas that certain named councillors may be seen to oppose them for whatever reason they may perceive. This is not a good starting point for anyone joining the council and could have long term adverse effects relationships between councillors. What counts is the end vote not who voted. Some councils have bad relationships between councillors which damage the whole efficiency of the council, pointless adding to any ill will.

---

"there is no such thing as a casual vacancy".  Er ... are you sure?

---

I was referring to a casual "councillor " my mistake. I will of course do my  penance and flail myself in public to appease the woke crowd as is expected these days :D

---

You don't need to do any of that for my sake.  I'm happy with the clarification and acknowledge your good grace in doing so.  Thank you.

---

For MM, whilst I understand your rationale for stating that a written vote is “advisable”, I’m afraid I have to counter with the observation that, in the absence of a broader reference, it must be assumed to be your own, rather than a specifically referenced source of “advice” which you proffer.
I understand the rationale you present, but I am fundamentally opposed to your supposition that secrecy is an ingredient of harmony.
Personally, I take the exact opposite starting point whereby I would reference Plato’s assertion that “…all knowledge that is divorced from justice be called cunning rather than wisdom…”

There will never be harmony when the foundation is built on deceit.
The public have a right to know which existing Cllrs voted and how, the candidate should know and the record should be in the minutes.
Anything else is an affront to openness and transparency.
In my opinion….

---

RAC, oh that a council could have a philosopher in their numbers rather than those that think they are. My suggestion for a written vote was an attempt to negate what is unfortunately a problem in many councils these days of personalities and perceived division. The point of openness and transparency is of course accepted but must be viewed in the light of advisory bodies( NALC) opposing complete registering details on voting on the grounds of saving workload on clerks by not stating that all voting should be registered with councillors votes logged and minuited as to how each member voted, for, against or abstained. Is this not full transparency? Is this not keeping the community informed of what their councillors are supporting or opposing so they can assess their performance? It seems that transparency is not a requirement when it is inconvenient.

---

"...and if the man lives who would belittle the study of philosophy, I quite fail to see what in the world he would see fit to praise..."

I'm keen on the subject of how the vote is conducted procedurally both fundamentally in terms of the record / demonstration of Cllr votes but also since I was fortunate enough to have been party to a cooption just this week passed where it was a show of hands and within 36 hrs 1 existing Cllr (that did NOT support the cooption) has resigned and another has followed suit also!
So it is a highly topical, current and personally fascinating topic );0)