I was the Parish Councillor who made the complaint against Cllr Dalton. The reason I made the complaint was that I believed it wrong that Cllr Dalton was asking for free use of the Parish Council Hall for an event her husband was organising.
The event was to be a folk festival, it is well know that Cllr Dalton is heavily involved in the local Folk Club, and that she and her husband run a business from home that sells, folk music DVDs and other products and promotes Folk events, in and around the area.
As part of the request Cllr Dalton was also requesting free use of the Parish Councils vehicle, free use of the Parish Workers, who were to be required to “haul” around private equipment, erect staging, etc and all this over a weekend. While Cllr Dalton did declare a personal interest, I thought she should declare a prejudicial interest because of the close connection of her husband and the close connection of her links with her Business.
The Standards Committee agreed with me that she was wrong, and she should have declared a prejudicial interest.
At the Charity meeting in which this request was made (the hall is part of a Charity) when I brought up the point that she should declare a prejudicial interest, as normal I was “rounded upon” by the same old people, namely Cllr St John, he made it known that “declarations are up to individual Cllrs” he did this in order, in my view, to protect Cllr Dalton. Cllr St John reads the same rules/guidance as I do, and therefore knew that what she was doing was wrong, instead of speaking up he chose to try and blur the issue. Shame on you Cllr St John.
Now the interesting part, It seems that in her defence to have her name removed from the Website, she implies that her good name has been tarnished, One reason she gives is that she did “not Speak” at the meeting, loud and clear to everyone reading this, CLLR DALTON SPOKE AT THAT MEETING AT LENGTH, WAS QUESTIONED BY FELLOW CLLRS, SHE GAVE DETAILED ANSWERS TO CLLRS PRESENT (that is how I know about free use of the Workers etc). And to prove what I am saying is true I had confirmation last night from a member of the public who was present at that Meeting. CLLR DALTON HAS LIED TO THE STANDARDS COMMITTEE IN ORDER TO HAVE HER NAME REMOVED FROM THE WEB PAGE.
Further, Cllr Dalton also seems to be making issue that she did not chair the Charity Meeting, in my complaint I made reference to the Minutes of the Meeting, her name is clearly down as Chairing that Meeting. If a mistake has been made, it still does not detract from the fact she has transgressed against the Code of Conduct, being Chair or not has no relevance.
Whoops I forgot to tell the Standards Committee that immediately after the Charity Meeting, she changed seats, and then Chaired the Finance Committee, the exact same item came up regarding free use of the hall, I again stated she should declare a prejudicial interest, I was again ignored. Cllr Dalton may not have chaired the first meeting but she did Chair the Finance Meeting.
In my books that is not being entirely honest about events and could be seen as misleading the Standards Committee again. If I remember correctly, at the end of letters I have received from the Monitoring Officer, it has very clearly stated the the matter is now closed as it were, AND THEIR IS NO FURTHER APPEAL. Why has Cllr Dalton been given special treatment ? everyone who`s name is on that website, and was innocent of any offence regarding the Code of Conduct now has the right to ask for their name to be removed, a precedent has been set.
I believe that this is not he first time that Cllr Dalton has, at best misled the Committee, and at worse, lied to the Committee. Not long ago, both she and Cllr Brindly made a joint complaint against myself to the Standards Committee, this was very shortly after Cllr Brindly assaulted me twice at a meeting. Both signed the complaint and made about 9 different complaints, Cllr Brindly lied on that complaint (more of this at a later date) so did Cllr Dalton, this Cllr was stood about 20 to 30 feet away from the incident that occurred and could not possibly have witnessed events as they happened, Cllr Dalton lied to the Standards Committee.
Lying to get oneself or others off transgressions against the code of conduct is itself an offence (bringing you office into disrepute) but I suspect very little will be done.
I have been evicted recently from several Parish Meetings and it just happens that Cllr Dalton was in the Chair for some of those evictions, surprise, surprise. I don’t flout the rules, I don’t lie to the Standards Committee, so why am I being the one persecuted? The standards of some Members of Anston Parish has to be called into question, but as long as Parish Councillors (regardless of party affiliation) do not stand up and say anything they are sending a clear message to the public that their own integrity is in question.