Declarations
Meeting: Wednesday, 12th July, 2023 11.30 am - Planning Committee
5. Rother Parking Review 2022
- Councillor Godfrey Daniel - Personal - Councillor Daniel declared a personal interest in item 5 as a holder of a blue badge. He did not consider this to be prejudicial.
Meeting: Wednesday, 18th October, 2023 11.30 am - Planning Committee
6. Traffic Regulation Order - Hastings Parking Review 2022-2023
- Councillor Godfrey Daniel - Personal - Councillor Daniel declared a personal interest in item 6 as a holder of a blue badge; as a resident of Lower Park Road, although his residence is not within the area of the proposal; and as a member of the Labour Party in relation to Borough Councillors who have expressed their support who are also members of the Labour Party. He did not consider these to be prejudicial.
Meeting: Wednesday, 15th November, 2023 10.30 am - Planning Committee
5. Traffic Regulation Orders - Eastbourne Parking Review 2022-23
- Councillor Godfrey Daniel - Personal - Councillor Daniel declared a personal interest in item 5 as a holder of a blue badge. He did not consider this to be prejudicial.
Meeting: Wednesday, 17th April, 2024 10.30 am - Planning Committee
5. Lewes Parking Review 2023-24
- Councillor Godfrey Daniel - Personal - Councillor Daniel declared a personal interest in item 5 as a holder of a blue badge. He did not consider this to be prejudicial.
Meeting: Wednesday, 15th May, 2024 10.30 am - Commons and Village Green Registration Panel
5. Request to withdraw application to register land at Bodiam Castle grounds including carriageway as a town or village green
- Councillor Godfrey Daniel - Personal - Councillor Daniel declared a personal interest in item 5 as someone who is personally acquainted with the applicant. He did not consider this to be prejudicial.
Meeting: Wednesday, 10th July, 2024 11.15 am - Planning Committee
7. Rother Parking Review 2
- Councillor Godfrey Daniel - Personal - Councillor Daniel declared a personal interest in item 7 as a holder of a blue badge. He did not consider this to be prejudicial.