IN November last year Cllr Jeanette Richards found herself in hot water by failing to declare an interest in the committee room.

So did her son-in-law Cllr David Thomas.

Both played leading roles in throwing out plans for a street market in Victoria Street, Paignton, when it came before a licensing sub-committee.

Both were directors of a catering company which has a street trading license issued by Torbay Council and it was ruled they should have declared a personal interest.

Cllr Richards was subsequently suspended from sub-committees for three months and Cllr Thomas received a censure.

It was emphasised at the time that the catering licence was never used to trade on the streets of the Bay, more for events on private or council-owned land.

One such event is Paignton Regatta on Paignton Green where Cllr Richards operates a catering van.

Regatta organisers are currently one of the fiercest opponents of a plan for a £500,000 play park on the Green, claiming it will reduce its space and signal the end of some of its main events during the week.

You never know, it may even have some kind of impact on Cllr Richards' catering van in the future.

Due to previous experiences, you may have thought that Cllr Richards would have been extra cautious when airing views without making her position absolutely clear.

That's why some observers were a tad surprised when she stood up at a recent public meeting and made it blatantly clear she was against the play park's planned location — without actually declaring she was a councillor.

Nobody is saying she was obliged to say who she was and, no doubt, many will have known she is a councillor.

In fact, a Torbay Council spokesman confirmed: "Under the community partnership constitution there is no specific requirement to declare an interest."

But some may say better to be safe than sorry, perhaps?

Mrs Richards spoke at the meeting organised by the Paignton Community Partnership and was quoted as saying: "I am not against the idea. I am against the location."

Her views may also put her in a difficult position when the proposals go before local planners — she is a member of the planning committee.

I asked Mrs Richards if she made it clear she was a councillor before addressing the meeting.

She said: "I would not have thought I did but I cannot remember."

But then she added: "I did not say I was a councillor.

"I would not get up and say I was Mrs Richards and I would not say I am councillor Richards. I was really speaking as Jeanette Richards."

She said she had a street trader's licence for the whole of the Bay.

And she asked: "Do you have to declare an interest in anything that goes on in the Bay?"

She added: "I do have a business establishment in the Bay but some of the people who want it (the play park) have a vested interest because they have their business all round.

"I don't think it will affect me. The regatta will probably do the best they can in what they have left."

She claimed: "Everybody has a go at me. You would have thought I had murdered somebody.

"I get asked by people all over the Bay if I will speak or give them some advice. That's what you get asked to do as councillors."

At the time of the public meeting she was not a fully-fledged member of the planning committee.

She 'subbed' for other councillors when they were unable to attend, becoming a full member just a few weeks ago.

About the play park plan, she insisted: "I am not against it. I just think it could be located to go to the other side of the green.

"It will be good for Paignton if located a little differently, more towards the Redcliffe Hotel.

"I want more for Paignton that will bring visitors in, but let's have something for everybody.

"The beautiful Green with the picnics and playing football and the lady with the donkeys is a lovely scene that will be lost."

She emphasised: "I do not know what I am going to think about anything until I have seen the plans and listened to all the arguments from all sides before I decide."

Cllr Thomas was also at the public meeting and raised a question at the end of the debate but insists he made it clear he was a councillor.

In fact, he is chairman of the planning committee.

He revealed: "When this comes to planning I will not be able to sit on that decision because I have a personal and prejudicial interest in the Green because we do work on the Green. I am going to ask if I can speak as a member of the public, but not as a councillor."

Wonder what mother-in-law will do?