A SENIOR district councillor made an "error of judgement" when she failed to declare a prejudicial interest before a debate over plans for a new Ongar health centre.

Di Collins, who is also chairman of Epping Forest Primary Care Trust, was reported to the Standards Board for England by Ongar Town Council after she failed to declare a prejudicial interest over the project when it was discussed by district councillors last September.

She also seconded the planning application, in support of the project which had been recommended for refusal by planning officers, and voted on the application which was passed by five votes to nil.

Independent investigating officer John Austin, who investigated the complaint when the case was referred back to the district council for determination, said Mrs Collins had breached the council's Code of Conduct but had had a "genuine and honest desire to see the health centre built for the local community".

At the end of Tuesday's 90-minute hearing, during which Mrs Collins said she was willing to attend training relating to declaring interests, the adjudication sub-committee decided to impose no sanctions against the Conservative councillor who has been council leader since the May elections.

Mrs Collins had said she believed she was acting in the best interests of Ongar residents in trying to push through the plans for a new health centre which would house all the town's medical practices in purpose-built accommodation on the Greensted Road lorry park site.

She told the hearing the existing Bansons Lane surgery was sub-standard and in poor condition and the new facilities required approval while funding was available.

She said: "It was urgent something was done. We'd had problems finding a site. This site (the lorry park) was owned by Essex County Council and they were going to use part of the centre for social services facilities. We had lots of discussions with the parish council over a long period of time."

Mr Austin said: "It's my view that given the prominent role she has in the PCT she should have considered the public perception in taking the actions she did."

Mrs Collins said: "I don't think I probably did fully consider the prejudicial interest. I should have read the guidelines more carefully. I knew I had to approach it carefully from the public perception bit - I really did consider that very carefully."

She added: "We were all so anxious to get this application through. One of the other councillors proposed this application (for approval) and then all of a sudden there was a silence (when no-one seconded it). I shouldn't have done it. I thought oh my goodness after all this we're going to lose it'. Again, I should have been more sensible. I shouldn't have been so enthusiastic, as I thought, for Ongar residents.

"It was over-enthusiasm in the cause. I should be careful that that doesn't happen again."

Mr Austin concluded Mrs Collins, a councillor for 17 years and chairman of the primary care trust for five years, "made an error of judgement" .

He added: "It was her desire to see the health centre provided for and there were no improper motives. Having said that she ought to have known what the legal requirements were with regard to the code and should have come to a different view."

The panel noted Mrs Collins's promise that she would attend training and would recommend that the council looked again at advice it provided councillors over declaring interests.