The last (Labour) government brought in a raft of measures which required public servants – when making decisions – to be open and honest about what may have influenced their judgements.

One of the consequences was that local Councillors were required to declare publicly if they had received any financial donations from, or had other links to, individuals, companies, Unions or other organisations which might benefit from a particular decision on which they were voting.

The move led to an improvement in the transparency of decision making. The new Code of Conduct was enforced initially by a National Standards Board but that responsibility soon passed to a local, independently chaired, “Standards Committee”.

Last week we published a list of Labour Council candidates who had declared on their election expenses returns the amounts donated to their campaign by interest groups such as the Local Government Trades Union UNISON.

A total of £ £2,385.65 was admitted as the cost of a 6 page glossy manifesto leaflet that had been printed and paid for by UNISON. It had apparently been delivered in all York wards except Heworth, Heslington, Haxby, Heworth Without, Huntington and Strensall. It remains unclear why electors were not given the manifesto in these wards especially as the total cost of the leaflet – according to UNISON – was £4724. Whether or not election expenses returns are accurate though is a matter that falls within the responsibilities of the Electoral Commission (and ultimately the Police) if inaccuracies are suspected.

A few days after the election expenses returns had been lodged with the Guildhall in June, the new York Council met to decide whether to change the budget for the current financial year.

One of the proposals tabled by the new Council Leader was to increase the amount allocated to the local government union to pay for their members to have “time off” to attend to union affairs. In total the cost of this concession was valued at £37,350. The budget amendment was carried with all Labour Councillors voting in favour of the proposal.

Councillors are not allowed by law to vote on issues in which they have a “prejudicial” interest. Essentially these are decisions where they might benefit from the proposal.

Councillors may also declare a “personal” interest. While this might not debar them from voting on an issue, it ensures that residents are aware of a possible influence on their voting behaviour.
At the June meeting the following Labour Councillors didn’t declare the Interest which arose out of the donation that UNISON had made towards their election expenses.
Cllrs Horton, Douglas, King, Scott, Semlyen, Looker, Watson, Alexander, Riches, Barnes, Fitzpatrick, Gunnell, Merrett, Cross, McIlveen, Burton & Jeffries.

5 other Councillors did declare personal interests either because they were current, or past, members of UNISON (Crisp, Fraser, Laing, Hodson & Williams)

(NB. Labour representatives for the Heworth and Heslington Wards had previously claimed that they did not issue the UNISON funded leaflet in their wards).

The issue is now one for the local Standards committee to consider.

We will publish later this week extracts from the standing Register of Interests which can be found on the Councils web site and which is supposed to list any donations made by third parties, including Unions, towards a councillors election costs. We have copies of the Register as it was at the end of October. It contains some surprises.

The media has reported today that experienced Councillor Ruth Potter has quit Labours ruling Council Cabinet in York. The decision comes only 6 months after she took up the post and against a background of increased criticism of Labours cavalier attitude towards consultation and expenses.
Labour cabinet members in York have already run up a £3750 bill for travel and hotel expenses in just 5 months.
1. Alexander £1,213.20
2. Gunnell £1,009.20
3. Simpson Laing £596.90
4. Crisp £518.20
5. Looker £295.35
6. Potter £67.50
7. Merrett £25.40
8. Fraser £24.30
• Total £3,750.05

The figure far exceeds anything claimed by leading Councillors over the last 10 years. It includes the now infamous visit to the Britain in Bloom awards ceremony, at the £119 a night St Andrews hotel in Scotland, by not one but 2 Labour Councillors. They were accompanied by 3 officials. Wouldn’t have been so bad if Cllrs Looker and Crisp had actually done anything to support the Britain in Bloom entry but it was all done and dusted by the time they took office.
Biggest individual claim came from Cllr Gunnell who handed over £954.00 of taxpayers money for the privilege of attending “The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy Annual Conference”.
Meanwhile Cllr Alexander has been to roving the country at taxpayers expense. Trips to Leeds, London, Birmingham, Wakefield, Halifax, Durham, Sunderland, Scarborough, Doncaster, Thirsk, Skipton and Huddersfield have added up to an eye watering £1213 bill for taxpayers. He was even accompanied to Lewisham by Cllr Looker as they apparently both needed to see a “mobile phone service for reporting graffiti”.
Meanwhile Cllr Crisp has visited Blackpool twice. Something that leading Councillors from York managed to avoid during the previous 10 years!
NB. Cllr Alexander has defended the claims saying that Cabinet members have sometimes paid travel costs “including international flights” themselves. We await with incredulity details of which international destinations the Cabinet have been visiting….. and why!

There has been some comment in the media over the last few days about York Labour Council candidates financial links to Labour.
Reproduced below are the amounts admitted by their candidates for election manifesto costs when they submitted their Council election expenses returns in May.
The UNISON invoice for a “donation in kind” (printing the Labour election manifesto) is also reproduced.
The question remaining to be answered is what happened to the rest of the donation if it wasn’t used by their candidates?
We’ll publish next week details of the “declarations of interest” made by Labour Councillors in June.

The investigation, revealed on this web site a couple of days ago, apparently revolves around the above letter which confirms a donation – in kind – of £4724 from UNISON to the York Labour Party..
Labour candidates at the election apparently declared on their expenses returns having received only a total of £2385 leaving £2338 unaccounted for.
It appears that Labour candidates in the following wards chose not to issue the manifesto to electors:
Haxby, Heworth, Heslington, Heworth Without, Huntington & Strensall.
Electors are given some reassurance that donations of this sort will be transparent.
The instructions to Councillors says:
“The Standards Board for England does not draw a distinction between direct financial assistance (payments of money directly to a Councillor for election or other expenses) and indirect assistance (such as payment for election posters or leaflets). You should register any person or organisation who has made a financial contribution (whether direct or indirect) to your election campaign or who assists you with the costs of carrying out your duties”.
The register of interests declared by Councillors can be viewed on the Councils web site.
Councillors are also required at the beginning of each meeting to indicate whether they have interests of this sort to declare. These are recorded in the minutes of the meetings (and again can be seen on the Councils web site).
More to follow on this as it becomes available.