Chair says we cannot reconsider decisions for a period of 6 months - are we right to smell a rat?

Question

Hi,

At our planning meeting last night two Cllrs requested that a planning application was added to the agenda for the next meeting but the request was refused by the Chair. We discussed this application last October and agreed to support it in principle. Since October, evidence has come to light proving the application does not comply with our Neighbourhod Plan. The district planning officer also undertoook a 21 day re-consultation in December which our Chair told us we could not participate in because they said the MO had told them we could not re-discuss the application whilst a complaint against the Chair was being investigated (this MO investigation has since closed), and the Chair said there was no need for us to add any further comments anyway - which many of us disagree with as we have multiple concerns to raise.

We have called an EGM, so are hoping to be able to rediscuss in the near future but my question is, since I am reletively new to being a Parish Councillor, is the Chair correct in saying we are not allowed to reconsider decisions for 6 month periods? If so, on what authority is this based as I have checked our standing orders and cannot see this information? It is sounding more and more to us like the Chair is obstructing our right to rediscuss this application, to the degree that we are now considering an MO complaint, but want to be sure that the Chair is incorrect in what he stated last night, so would sincerely appreciate advice regarding this.

Answer 1

If you resolved you support it in principle, by  definition you can change your mind if detail emerges that shifts the balance. Resolutions can be reversed if information comes to light subsequently to justify them. The chair cannot unilaterally decide that the application cannot be put forward as an agenda item. I have heard of the six months rule will see if I can find out more.

Comments

Thank you so much Graeme, I shall await your advice re the 6 month rule.

---

Model Standing Orders 7(a)

---

Hi Dave, thanks for your guidance. I’ve been and read 7(a) and perhaps you could further advise- as we have only resolved to “support in principle” would a majority decision for us to then object actually be viewed as a removal of the resolution or a clarification of our earlier position now we have new information affecting the “principle” of our initial support? Also given we have been formally reconsulted by the district council for further comments- does that statutory consultation response, which would because of the new information be a response of objection and not to continue to support in principle, supersede 7 (a)?

---

As Dave the Clerk points out, the six month rule on preventing alteration to a resolution derives from Model standing orders,I think I am correct in saying that it isn't mandatory from a legislative view to include it by default.  However, if your PC's Standing Orders already include it, you would have to abide by it, but check out the actual wording.

---

The fact that the Chair is subject to an MO investigation into a complaint has no relevance whatsoever in council business. This is quite simply because A) it is a personal matter between the MO and the person accused an B) until the MO renders their findings the person concerned is innocent of all accusations and C) the PC will only be involved depending on the MO's findings and cannot and should not sit in judgement of the outcome.

On re-visiting a previous decision: I would propose that to not do so, when new relevant facts are presented, is a most basic of dereliction of a councils duty.

---

Thanks for all the sound advice. Mentorman, I completely agree that the MO should not be obstructing our right to participate in the statutory consultation and that it would be a deriliction of our duty not to amend our initial response. Unfortunately the Cllr who called for the EGM along with myself has resigned this week with immediate effect as they have had enough, so the EGM will not now be able to go ahead as planned (we were still in the 7 day waiting period for a reply from the Chair before being able to issue the agenda)
We had our planning committee meeting on Wednesday and when the planning updates section began I asked to speak regarding the application concerned (I am the planning officer for the village the application site is based in) only for the Chair to refuse to allow me to speak claiming that the application was not on the agenda- I countered this by saying that two other applications had just been discussed that were also not on the agenda and the response from the Chair was then that we could not rediscuss the application because the MO said we were not allowed to and the MO that the MO said there was no need for us to discuss it. This all just seems so wrong. I suppose my only recourse is to approach the Monitoring Officer in the hope they might assist?

---

It goes round and round based on the information presented. From what is said it appears that the chair is somewhat at fault in this case and for what reason is I am afraid for the council to decide.
If the chair is indeed under investigation, and it seems hat there may be some connection between the complaint to the MO and this particular matter then under the Nolan Priciples and codes of conduct directions ( and possibly standing orders) the chair should declare an interest (undefined) and pass the chair to the vice chair or a nominated councillor whilst the matter is discussed and voted on by council and abstain from ANY participation. This is what would be expected of any councillor let alone the chair. If in doubt withdraw from any participation thus removing and suspicions completely. It is called integrity.

---

I'm baffled by this whole MO saga. The role of the MO is to investigate breaches of the Code of Conduct. This doesn't extend to instructing a parish council regarding what they may, or may not, discuss at their meetings (unless it relates directly to the breach). Have you seen a written instruction from the MO stating that you must not discuss this matter? If the MO has written to the council as an entity, rather than an individual, you are entitled to see it. Perhaps the MO's advice was that the Chair should not be involved in further deliberations regarding this application? That might be prudent, depending upon the nature of the complaint.

If the planning authority has started the re-consultation process, it suggests that the details of the application will have changed sufficiently for this to be treated as a new application and considered accordingly, regardless of the whole six-month rule debate. In any case, the material change is sufficient to qualify as new information which allows a previous decision to be revisited.

I'd be interested to know whether your Chair has completed the basic training course for the role. It's a vital reminder of the limitations of their powers. Covid permitting, we are approaching the election of Chair season shortly; a decision that shouldn't be taken lightly.

---

Hi Dave, Thank you for your help and advice. We've seen nothing in writing from the MO. A statement was read out by the proper officer which claimed to quote the MO verbatim (and this is acknowledged as an express quote in the minutes also), as a result of a phone conversation between the Chair and the MO. I quite agree that it makes sense for the Chair to have withdrawn from any discussion whilst under investigation, but the rest of us should have been allowed to discuss.

What is interesting is that I have since been informed that the MO has concluded their investigation and will not be taking matters any further with the Chair- apparently they concluded matters over a week ago,  informed both parties (and also our Clerk) the same day and well before our meeting last week where the Chair once again stated that we could not discuss the application in part due to the MO's statement (the other reasons given as I say were lack of it being on the agenda (despite 2 x other applications not on the agenda then being discussed), a claim it could not be discussed again within 6 months anyway, and then when challenged given the other two un-agendered applications being allowed to be discussed it was then claimed we were out of time). Mentorman, I think has hit the nail on the head by saying this just goes round and round as I seem to jump through all the hoops only to get a different excuse each time!

---

For further clarification of course you can visit the main councils web site where the MO findings should be available in writing and check it against the "reported" decision

---

So the MO said it to the chair and the chair said it to the clerk and the clerk said it you. That sounds like an old music hall song! If the MO has been quoted verbatim in the minutes, I would send the MO a copy for verification.

Based solely on what you have told us, I strongly suspect that you are being manipulated. I don't often use language such as this, but there are too many unfathomable conundra for this to be a simple misunderstanding.

---

Hi all,
Just wanted to give a brief update- I have written to the MO asking for confirmation that they have been quoted accurately within our minutes and await their reply. I also emailed the Chair to ask why there was no time to discuss the application in planning updates and whether it could instead be added to the agenda for next month under the updates section. I recieved no reply this request, and instead have been sent the agenda for next months meeting and there are two items on the agenda of note from the Chair, one is a proposal to resolve to not discuss the application again unless the district council issue another consultation regarding it, and item 2. is to hold a vote of no confidence in me. Apparently the Chair has made a complaint to the MO about me, because I sent a message re: EGM to some of the other Cllrs and forgot to cc in the Clerk, I am yet however to have had formal notification of this complaint but the Chair has proposed to hold a vote of no confidence regardless and is proposing to resolve to forbid any further discussion of the application by any of us unless we are formally consulted by the disctrict council first. I frankly find this all completely bizarre, and intend to urgently contact the MO as a result, but any advice would be sincerely appreciated.

---

You should have received a copy of the allegation sent to the MO. You need to know who resolved to call for a vote of no confidence. The chair is not empowered to do that unilaterally.  The MO should only deal with breaches of the code of conduct of legislative breaches, and I can't see how what you have done amounts to either. I think the whole council, not the chair must resolve to exclude discussion on non confidential items. I can't see why discussion about an application cannot continue. The council can only respond during the consultation period but can discuss anything they choose. First suggestion demand a copy of the chair's complaint. If the chair refuses, make a complaint about him/ her to the MO for breach of the code of conduct.

---

Thank you so much for the advice Graeme_r, I did as you suggested and spoke with the MO who then contacted our Clerk and advised that the vote of no confidence against me needed to be removed from the agenda and it duly was prior to the start of the meeting. The Chair nevertheless made a public statement informing all present at the meeting that he has made a complaint against me and would immediately table the vote of no confidence once the MO's investigation had been concluded. My understanding was that these matters are supposed to be private and confidential whilst they are being investigated- indeed our code of conduct states we are not supposed to disclose private matters, so this seems rather unreasonable. The Chair then held a vote to ban me from sending any further communications regarding the planning application concerned which again seems unreasonable, so I will now look into what breaches these actions may constitute with a view to making a complaint. Thank you again for taking the time to reply to me.

---

I wouldn't lose any sleep over the vote of no confidence. It has no legal standing whatsoever.

Report the fact that the Chair has openly discussed his complaint at a council meeting to the MO. If the MO does decide to investigate the complaint, none of those present at the meeting should be called as witnesses, as they have participated collectively in a discussion of the complaint and are therefore no longer independent.

Ask your Clerk to clarify the legal status of the vote to ban you from sending further communications, with reference to the legislative framework.

Finally, consider submitting a Code of Conduct complaint against the Chairman for bullying, for abusing his position and for bringing the council into disrepute. The complaint form will be on your district council's website. Read the guidance notes carefully and apply them to your particular circumstances, as they're all slightly different.

Hope this helps

---

In addition to the excellent response from DavetheClerk I would add that Chair has no authority to instruct or prevent you to do anything, so if he succeeds in getting a resolution to prevent you communicating about the planning application, it would be unlawful and baseless.

---

Thanks once again DavetheClerk and Graeme_r, you have really helped me and put my mind at rest. The form to the MO has just been submitted after spending the weekend comilling evidence etc. and I will now request the legislation from the Clerk regarding the resolution to ban all communication, as I completely agree it cannot be lawful.