Enforcement of the provisions of the Localism Act 2011

Question

In late November 2022, 3 parish councillors were reported to both the Unitary Authority and the Police for non declaration of interests. Over six months a series of emails between the police and the unitary authority quite clearly show that the police were not interested in pursuing the matter. This information was received via a FOI. In the meantime the parish council published a minute in December 2022, stating that the police had dismissed the complaint. This had to be removed as the complaint was still being investigated. One of the councillors is an ex police officer. Other non declarations have not been raised as incidents as I am awaiting the result. These events are also with the IOPC at the moment in a complaint. The interesting thing is that a sister authority had the same problem with the same police force. What is going on? These councillors have also threatened myself and again the police are not interested. I have a meeting with my MP in the new year who is part of the Justice ministry and so I hope will be able to help. Any advice?

Answer 1

I had a similar experience.
Reported non submission of DoI direct to police since it was entirely anticipated as being a waste of time presenting to MO.
The police did take forward the investigation BUT referred it to the MO (local authority is a prosecuting authority (like the post office and we all know how that ended up))

MO wouldn’t proceed with prosecution - despite the subject Cllr making financial gain from a planning application in the parish for land he hadn’t declared and holding a contract with the PC - neither of which were declared.
When the omissions were highlighted - and the fact that they were ‘strict liability’ offences, the MO response was simply that “…since it has now been remedied, it wasn’t in the public interest to take formal action…”

And that outcome fully justified the original belief that any contact via MO is a complete waste of time.

Comments

I think we need to galvanise ourselves together on this. I am taking out parish council to a tribunal in the Summer of 2025 for irregularities in their accounts. They have refused an inspection under AGAR and lied to the Information Commissioner and the external auditors. This will be laid in front of a first tier tribunal. The council hold £40,000 in their balance sheet which is not theirs. All the legal and accounting work to arrange this was done by relatives of the chairman, who also had a controlling interest in the loan to a limited company of the £40K. A petition to highlight this to parishioners was ignored with police being called to stop it being presented. It really is like Russia.

---

Hi

I wonder if you could say a bit more about "This will be laid in front of a first tier tribunal".  Which aspect of the transgressions you have described does this relate to.

I ask because, to be honest, I was not aware that a tribunal covered any aspect of parish council governance, and I would be interested to know.

---

Hi, A complaint was raised to the ICO regarding a refusal to inspect the accounts under AGAR. The ICO decided that on the "balance of probabilities" that the council had complied with the inspection. Obviously the council had not. The ICO allowed an appeal to the First Tier Tribunal as they could not be sure of the compliance. The ICO decided that they were not expert enough to make that decision. Subsequently after explaining to the responsible external auditors that the council were falsely compiling the accounts after repeated statements to auditors and council minutes that the auditors had got things wrong, the accounts for four years have had to be changed. This was because the auditors sent me the email chain that proved the council were not telling the truth. This is a £40,000 issue in a council with a turnover of under £10,000. There are still issues with the accounts, which will be taken forward. If you demonstrate to the ICO of transgressions in procedures they will at the very least provide you with the tribunal option. The fact of the matter is that the £40,000 is not the council's, it is the communities, but the council seized it for a third party company for which they are all members. The 300+ parishioners in our community had no say in the matter.

Answer 2

I know of a serious breach which was papered over and I think there has only been one prosecution, as usually happens politicians are happy to churn out out laws but never bother to check if they are being enforced
As I walk round  my Parish I saw laws ignored on a daily basis for example obeying planning law seems to voluntary these days

Comments

The police have now put into the decision making process that there needs to be "public interest" on the matter. Well a petition with 30+ names was raised highlighting register of interests as one of the many issues within the council. But when it was going to be presented the police turned up, to prevent it being delivered to the council. An ex police officer is on the council. Corruption, Corruption, Corruption. Even our local unitary authority do not understand what is going on. Despair!

Answer 3

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is the ultimate authority for deciding whether to pursue charges in cases involving criminal offenses under Section 34 of the Localism Act 2011, as it is for most criminal cases in England and Wales. While the police are responsible for conducting the initial investigation, the CPS evaluates the evidence gathered and determines whether charges should be brought.