Conflict dilemma has councillors questioning their community roles

ELECTED representatives in Mayo have asked if they need to step back from community organisations to avoid running into difficulty for having a conflict of interest.

Clarity has again been sought by county council members where conflict of interest has begun appearing as an item on meeting agendas.

Matters had been complicated by correspondence received that was at variance with advice given at a previous meeting, Councillor Brendan Mulroy told the October meeting of the authority.

He wanted to know, if a councillor is a director of a charitable organisation or committee member in a local voluntary sports club, is there a conflict of interest in giving them GMA funding.

The correspondence they received said there is a conflict and he wanted clarity on it.

Council chief executive Kevin Kelly said there is a declarable interest there. For GMA, for example, a list of allocations should be presented and agreed by members at a meeting and if someone is a member of a club it should be noted.

It doesn't stop the allocation being made, he stressed. It just notes the relationship with the entity that's getting money.

However, Councillor Mulroy wasn't happy that they could be 'talking out both sides of our mouths'.

He felt that to be clear of conflict, they should all step down from the voluntary committees they sit on. He couldn't see how they can go forward as people looking in from the outside will see a clear conflict.

His colleague Councillor Gerry Coyle said he has a conflict of interest in everything he does as he tries to get as much money as he can for the people of Erris.

If he gave money for a pontoon and had a boat (which he doesn't) and was going to use it, was that a conflict of interest, he asked.

Councillor Michael Loftus said he understood if you got financial benefit from funding, such as GMA, then you had a conflict. For the majority of what they do they don't get a financial benefit out of it.

This was a regulation from government and it has to be changed nationally, he added.

The question of how do you pre-empt a benefit was raised by Councillor Michael Burke.

He raised the scenario of him supporting a variation to allow planning permission for a housing development to go ahead. If he sold a house in it at a later date, it could be seen as a conflict of interest as he would have supported it and then gone on to benefit from it.

“How do you pre-empt this?” he asked.

Closer to home, he had supported the pop-up swimming pool in Ballinrobe, where his grandchildren now attend. Is that a conflict, he asked, because he had supported it for the community.

“Where does it stop?” he wanted to know.

The chief executive agreed it is complicated by the fact it is not just about conflict of interest but even a perceived conflict. And he suggested a workshop on the matter would be useful.

Mr. Kelly said this has been in place for years and it isn't intended to stop members being involved in their communities and clubs.

It is about having it on the record that 'I am involved' and then there's a protection.

* Funded under the Local Democracy Reporting Scheme