19 March 2010

Mr S Hardwicke Carruthers

Via email ([FOI #29992 email])

Our ref: CS/10/023/HJP

(Please quote our reference when contacting us)

If telephoning contact Hilary Pook on 020 7217 4734

or if using email send to: h.pook@lgo.org.uk

Dear Mr Hardwicke Carruthers

Request for information

In your email of 2 March, you suggested that there was a change of mind over the transfer of Lancaster City Council between the Commission meetings of 15 October 2009 and 1 December 2009. This is not the case; it was only a matter of deciding the date from which the transfer would be effective from. Below is the text of an email sent by Nigel Karney to Tony Redmond and Anne Seex on 3 November 2009.

“At the Cssn meeting on 15 October it deferred a decision on the transfer of Lancaster City Council in order to establish the current guidance in relation to the number of years that needed to elapse before a previous employment of an LGO could reasonably be disregarded.

The position is that LGA 1974 Schedule 4 Section 23 (1)(2) states:

2)     A Local Commissioner shall not at any time conduct a case arising in an area if it is wholly or partly within an area for which one of those authorities is responsible and, within the five years ending at that time (“the disqualification period”), the Local Commissioner

(a)    has been a member of that authority,

(b)    has taken action on behalf of that authority in the exercise of any of their functions, or

(c)    has taken action which, by virtue of an enactment, is treated as having been taken by that authority in the exercise of any of their functions.

However the Register of Interests attached to the Code of Conduct asks LCs to declare any bodies of which they've been a paid employee within the previous 10 years.

So whilst you are not precluded from making the transfer within 5 years of employment it may be appropriate to delay for 10 years if this is feasible.”

Anne Seex then confirmed in an email to Nigel Karney that she left the employment of Lancaster City Council in April 2000, so the Commission was able to agree the transfer of Lancaster to Anne Seex' office from April 2010 at its December meeting, as it will then have been 10 years since she was employed there. The authority for this decision is the Commission's, at the December meeting.

Until April 2010, Lancaster City Council is in the area covered by the Ombudsman based in Coventry, as it has been for a number of years. Jane Martin is not investigating the Crinkley Bottom matter.

That concludes my response. If you feel I have not dealt properly with your request, you have the right to appeal and, should you wish to do so, I can supply a copy our internal complaints procedure. If you do request an internal review - can you please indicate why you are unhappy with my response. You also have the right to apply to the Information Commissioner to determine whether your request has been properly dealt with. You should note however that the Commissioner will not consider any complaint where you have not first exhausted our internal complaints process or where there has been undue delay in contacting him. You will be able to obtain further details of the Information Commissioner's role from the website on www.ico.gov.uk.

Yours sincerely

Hilary Pook

Hilary Pook

Communications and Records Manager

LGO 01 (03/08)