A Disclosable Interest. The Evidence.

The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has published the guide on Openess and Transparency which applies to councillors.                                      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/240134/Openness_and_transparency_on_personal_interests.pdf                                                      Quote: They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships. If you have a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not recorded in the register and which relates to any business that is or will be considered at a meeting where you are present, you must disclose this to the meeting and tell the monitoring officer about it.                                                                                                                                                  This brings us to Anston Parish councillor Judy Dalton and her Gangs and Grooming business. http://gangsandgroomingeducation.vpweb.co.uk/Contact-Us.html                          which is run from her home address (in Dinnington) and also involves her husband and daughter.

What are pecuniary interests? A person’s pecuniary interests are their business interests  (for example their trade, profession, contracts or any company they are associated with)  Dalton + Gangs and Grooming=Pecuniary Interest.                                                 Dalton was Adviser to Cabinet Member for Safeguarding Children and Adults (May 2012 to May 2013) and Chair of Licensing Board (May 2013 to date) Licensing Committee (May 2013 to date) She has never disclosed her business interest to RMBC’s Monitoring Officer Jacqui Collins who, it must be said, is about as effective as an handbrake on a canoe. Collins has given one of her minions, Neil Concannon, Service Solicitor, the responsibility for dealing with this and his view (read opinion) is “This (information) does not mean Cllr.Dalton has an interest in the Gangs and Grooming business”.                                                                                                         Which part of ‘disclosable pecuniary interests’ does Concannon not understand?           Why is Concannon-following orders from Collins-protecting Dalton?                               What does the Monitoring Officer really know about the scale of CSE in Rotherham and Dalton’s Gangs and Grooming business?                                                                                     The guidance from the DCLG is quite clear: You must declare all business interests.                                                                                                                                           The Legal Services department at RMBC chooses to turn away from an uncomfortable truth and pretend this is not a problem. This head-in-the-sand attitude was the main reason why Rotherham council was criticised as a failure and why five Commissioners were appointed to exercise proper control.


This entry was posted in Community News, Parish Council News and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to A Disclosable Interest. The Evidence.

  1. Stuart Little. says:

    If Jacqui Collins knew her job and functions properly she would know the following: after every election a councillor has to sign, in the presence of the Clerk a Declaration of Interests.They are required to complete forms relating to the Code of Conduct which requires declaration of employment details, business interests, land ownership, beneficial interest in any land within the Parish, membership of trade unions, charitable organisations, professional associations and any organisation with a main purpose including influencing public opinion or policy. When completed and countersigned these documents are open for inspection by any member of the general public and must be available at every meeting of the Parish Council.
    To declare that Dalton ‘does not have a declarable interest in gangs and grooming’ is ludicrous and a falsehood.
    Jacqui Collins was a political appointee so she will make sure she does not rock the (Labour) boat.
    She is a bloody disgrace to her profession.


  2. Colin Tawn says:

    The Monitoring Officer is the Responsible Person at RMBC for legal matters and complaints about councillors not Concannon and I agree with Stuart Thornton, the Standards Committee at RMBC is a farce. There is evidence that Labour councillors are protected whilst Independent councillors are subjected to close scrutiny by Collins and the kangaroo court laughingly called the Standards Committee. What standards? The situation with Dalton and her declarable interest would be headline news if Dalton worked for a commercial enterprise.
    No wonder Louise Casey said they are ‘not fit for purpose’.


  3. S Thornton says:

    I wonder why Mr Concannon is investigating and then making decisions about Complaints under the Code of Conduct. He has no legal right to do so. The Monitoring Officer, Mrs Collins is the person who makes the decision if a complaint is to be dismissed or to go forward to the Standards Committee. It seems we have a situation here that an unelected Employee of RMBC is making enquiries, and then decisions on Code of Conduct Complaints.
    I think that the whole Code of Conduct/ Standards Committee system at RMBC is a farce, and Mrs Collins should face an investigation into the way she operates. Her system is bias, secretive, and unfair.


  4. Insider says:

    Collins and Concannon are obviously in denial. How can either of them say Dalton does not have a pecuniary interest in gangs and grooming? Dalton’s grubby little company is linked to her via her family therefore she should have registered her interest in it.
    I hope the Commissioners will look into this affair and force Collins and Dalton to reveal what they know about CSE and when they knew and why they did not take any actions to prevent further abuse of young people.
    This is a farce and now we know why Rotherham is in special measures.


Comments are closed.