Following our story yesterday we have been asked where residents can find their MPs register of interests. This contains details of any gifts & hospitality received. It can be accessed here http://tinyurl.com/MP-hospitality. Compared to the local councils register it seems to be commendably up to date although this may be a legacy of the MPs expenses scandal which enveloped Parliament a few years ago.

Local Tory MP Julian Sturdy’s entry is unexceptional. He declares only income received from the family farm.

It turns out that Hugh Bayley York’s Labour MP came only in Bronze medal position in the Olympics hospitality stakes. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2200483/Chris-Heaton-Harris-Tory-MP-tops-freebie-table-11-750-Olympic-tickets.html
His £4500 package was eclipsed by Tory MPs Chris Harris and John Stevenson.

click to enlarge

Meanwhile confusion grows on the York Council as the Leader and his chief hospitality scout continue to remember events that they attended but failed to record on the interests register.

There are obvious discrepancies between the York Council’s “gifts” register and the”interests” register which need to be reconciled quickly.

The only way that public confidence is likely to be restored would if an independent enquiry into the anomalies is undertaken.

The York Council meeting on Thursday is to be asked by Labour to fly a “Gay Pride” flag over the Mansion House while taxpayers will be asked to fund a publication which will give the views of candidates in the Police Commissioner elections.

The LibDems have put down motions which would see 350 litter bins returned to the City’s streets while the Tories want to reduce the proportion of affordable housing provided on local developments to 10% (currently the proportion required ranges up to 40%)

Labour ruin a perfectly reasonable (to liberals) motion about equal rights by reopening the symbolism divisions of yester years. In the eighties some Labour activists wanted to fly the red flag above the Mansion House following one of their election victories. They were talked out of the idea by wiser heads and for many years now everyone has agreed that only the York flag would be flown there.

Perhaps more worrying is the plan to “ensure York Pride 2012 and Parade for Equal Marriage on Saturday 21st July is publicised via all CYC communications” Given that the motion will be debated only 5 working days before the event takes place, that is pretty much impossible. In any event, many of the thousands of communications issued each week by the Council are to defaulters. How appreciative the recipient of a penalty charge notice for illegal car parking would be, if urged to join a gay pride march, is a matter for speculation (and might be seen by some as a cruel and unusual punishment).

The arrangements for the Police Commissioner elections are a mess. The Commissioners powers are at best obscure to most potential electors. Voters will be expected to access a web site to get details of candidates and their policies.

In York and North Yorkshire candidates will be allowed to spend up to a legal expenses limit of £111,814, in pursuit of the £70,000 a year job.

However, asking Council Taxpayers to fund – what for many is an unnecessary change in Police management arrangements – would be an insult to the many hard working people in the City who are struggling to make ends meet.

Typically, a Council newspaper costs £3000 to produce to which should be added delivery costs of around £7000.

One Labour Councillor from York has already been declared as a candidate in the November Commissioner elections. The Tories have selected someone from West Yorkshire to be their flag bearer.

http://tinyurl.com/York-Council-12th-July-2012

Upon taking office, each Councillor must record any Interests that they may have on a publicly available Register. The Register can be viewed “on line” at the Councils web site.

The list is intended to make clear what Interests individual Councillors may have and which might influence their voting behaviour. While it is mainly aimed at reassuring electors that Councillors do not bring influence to bear on issues from which they might personally benefit, it also provided transparency on any links with Companies, Trades Unions and other outside bodies.

Generally the system has worked well and until recently there seemed to be no reason to suppose that all Councillors had not been diligent in filling in and maintaining the accuracy of the register.

As reported on this site previously, concerns were raised about Labour Councillors not declaring an interest at the June Council meeting when a proposal to increase the number of Trades Union officials paid for by taxpayers was considered. The vote came only a few days after candidates at the local elections had confirmed, in returns lodged at the Guildhall, the amounts paid towards their election expenses by third parties.

Most were expected to declare contributions at least from the political party that had nominated them.
By the 26th October, 12 members of the Labour group had failed to register any donations towards their election expenses.

The guidance on completing the register is clear: “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. This may include your political party”.

A complaint about this irregularity was registered with the local Standards committee.
A few days later several Councillors updated their Register entries with 2 now admitting a donation towards their election expenses having been made by UNISON (Cllrs Laing and Crisp).
3 Councillors (Hodgson, Funnell and McIlveen) continued to claim that they had received no help towards the costs of the election (although their running mates in the wards concerned had by then admitted at least a contribution from the Labour Party).

The Standards Committee must now decide whether the Register of interests is now accurate and what action to take – if any – on the votes which were recorded at Council meetings without the appropriate Declaration if Interest being in place.

Register of Interests. (Source York Council web site) click image to enlarge

Following the controversial £5000 donation by UNISON to cover the costs of York Labour candidates election manifesto at Mays Council elections, I understand that a member has asked for an inquiry into how the money was spent.
It appears that around 50% of the donation is unaccounted for in the Election Expenses Returns declared by the candidates.