More Potential Libdem Conflict of Interest Clouds Westmorland & Furness Council Tax Decision

Westmorland & Furness Council’s budget meeting of 27th February 2025 is under fresh scrutiny after it emerged that Liberal Democrat councillor Suzanne Pender took part in – and voted for – the authority’s council‑tax resolution while also being paid clerk to Skelwith Parish Council.

During the full‑council debate on Item 103, “Electoral Review – Submission of Warding Arrangements”, minutes record that “Cllr Pender supported the proposals as one of the ward and parish councillors.”

That description prompted questions about her parish role. A check of the council’s register confirms Cllr Pender is not a parish councillor but the parish clerk for Skelwith.

Parish precepts must be agreed in an open meeting before the district, unitary or county authority incorporates them into its overall council‑tax demand. Skelwith held only two meetings in the relevant period – 8 October 2024 and 14 January 2025 – and the published minutes of both make no mention of approving a 2025/26 budget or precept.

Nonetheless, Westmorland & Furness’s February budget papers show an increased precept for Skelwith that was rolled into the final tax resolution.

Why this matters

As clerk, Cllr Pender is remunerated from Skelwith’s precept. That gives her a pecuniary interest in any decision that raises the parish charge. Under the authority’s own code of conduct – and the Localism Act 2011 – members with such interests must declare them and withdraw from the vote.

If a councillor is present at a meeting of the council or its executive or any committee of or any committee, sub-committee, joint committee, or joint sub-committee of the authority, and have a disclosable pecuniary interest relating to any business that is or will be considered at the meeting, they must not:

• participate in any discussion of the business at the meeting, or if they become aware

of a disclosable pecuniary interest during the meeting participate further in any

discussion of the business, or

• participate in any vote or further vote taken on the matter at the meeting.

These prohibitions apply to any form of participation, including speaking as a member of the public.

It is also a criminal offence to participate in the business of the council where that business involves a disclosable pecuniary interest.

If you are found guilty of such a criminal offence, a councillor can be fined up to £5,000 and disqualified from holding elected office as a councillor for up to five years.

The Westmorland and Furness Council published minutes, however, record no declaration and show Cllr Pender voting for the full council‑tax package that included Skelwith’s unapproved council tax precept increase.

Question & Implication

Was the Skelwith precept legally set? | If not, households may be paying an unlawful charge.

Should Cllr Pender have recused herself? Failure to do so could constitute a breach of the members’ code and, potentially, the offence of participating with a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Residents or councillors could refer the matter to the Monitoring Officer or the Local Government Ombudsman; repayment or re‑billing may follow if the precept is ruled invalid.

What residents can do

Check your bill – the Skelwith precept appears as a separate line.

Contact the Monitoring Officer – ask whether the parish precept was validly adopted.

Attend the next parish council meeting – demand sight of the budget resolution and vote and why no parish‑council minute exists approving the 2025/26 precept;

The matter raises broader questions over the diligence of precept collection and the need for councillors to police their own financial interests rigorously. Until those questions are answered, every Skelwith resident is paying for a decision that based on the council minutes was never lawfully made.