Councillor Speht angrily denies that he had anything other than a "personal" interest in the matter at hand, but Labour rival Councillor John Miles informed the Committee that he had evidence from Speht's own entry in the Register of Members' Interests, that the level and nature of the relationship between the LibDem and the company submitting the application would mean that such an interest was "prejudicial". For the avoidance of doubt, the two terms are defined within the Code of Conduct for Councillors which appears on Swansea Council's website and reads thus:
10. (1) You must in all matters consider whether you have a personal interest, and whether this code of conduct requires you to disclose that interest.
(2) You must regard yourself as having a personal interest in any business of your authority if —
(a) it relates to, or is likely to affect —
(i) any employment or business carried on by you;
(b) a member of the public might reasonably perceive a conflict between your role in taking a decision, upon that business, on behalf of your authority as a whole and your role in representing the interests of constituents in your ward or electoral division
12.(1)...where you have a personal interest in any business of your authority you also have a prejudicial interest in that business if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgement of the public interest.
The words, meaning and sentiment of the above, whilst in legalese and somewhat verbose, area clear. If you think you have more than a passing relationship with anyone involved in any matter being considered by you Authority, or if you think any member of the public might reasonably arrive at the conclusion that you might, then you have an "interest". Moreover, if you think that the public might reasonably conclude that the nature of that interest is so great that your judgement of what is in the public interest becomes impaired, then you have a "prejudicial interest". Clear so far? Good, then let's move on...
Councillor Speht believed that his "interest" in the matter before the Council (the application for a wind farm to the north of the city) amounted to a "personal interest" and he had previously judged that he could stay and speak at meetings concerning the applicant (npower renewables) but NOT vote. Apparently he had done this at a Planning Committee concerning an application for another wind farm by npower renewables in the neighbouring authority of Neath Port Talbot (in which Swansea was a statutory consultee and Councillors had to decide what would be the Authority's response to the consultation) and this had not been challenged by any member of the public or fellow elected Members.
However, given that the application before councillors on Thursday directly affected the City & County of Swansea, a greater deal of attention was paid to how Members conducted themselves during the decision-making process. It should also be noted here, that due to the ridiculously slow way in which the Planning Section of Swansea Council works, npower renewables put in an appeal on the grounds of "non determination" to the National Assembly for Wales, so Swansea Councillors are again now only acting as consultees, rather than decision-makers in this application process.
Such was the level of attention given to Councillor Speht's involvement in the the progress of the application, Councillor John Miles had read through Speht's entry on the Declaration of Interests and found reference to hospitality received by him courtesy of npower renewables going back to 2005-6 and evidence of his employer, a company also involved in developing wind farms (as detailed on Cllr Speht's LinkedIn page), having links with npower renewables projects and Speht's own membership of the British Wind Energy Association - the body which lobbies in favour of wind farms.
Now, going back to the wording of the Code of Conduct, given the information before you, as a member of the public, would you think that Councillor Speht had either a) a personal interest, b) a prejudicial interest or c) was up to his armpits in it? Only YOU can decide! Answers on the back of an envelope to: The Public Sector Ombudsman of Wales...
For the record, I declared in writing to the City's Head of Planning and to the Head of Legal & Democratic Services that I had a Personal & Prejudicial Interest in the matter before the Committee and thus did not attend and asked for my Declaration of Interest to be reported to the Committee. My interest being that I used to work for a PR agency that used to advice npower renewables and I had also previously accepted hospitality from the company in the form of attending rugby matches with them at the Liberty Stadium.
.jpg)

Never mind the simpleton Speht take a look at Peter Blacks comments about the Tory candidate for Wrexham.
ReplyDeleteHow does the self serving hypocrite Peter Black get away with twisting the truth.
If there was ever an award for "bare faced" cheek Peter Black would win hands down. He dares to criticise the "Tory" candidate for Wrexham for his proffessional actions regarding lap dancing clubs and the like when his own LIB DEM comrades in Swansea just passed a LAP DANCING club in Swansea near to a church.
Peter Black is a disgrace to Swansea, he is a bl--dy HYPOCRITE.