Greens leader Zack Polanski cleared over London houseboat council tax row

Greens leader Zack Polanski has been cleared of allegations that he breached the Greater London Authority (GLA) Code of Conduct amid concerns he may not have paid the correct council tax while living on a houseboat.

Mr Polanski, a member of the London Assembly, revealed in a witness statement published on Wednesday that he believed council tax charges were administered through mooring fees which he regularly paid for the boat.

Mr Polanski faced mounting questions last month over whether his houseboat, moored in east London, was his primary residence and therefore liable for council tax.

The party initially said he only stayed on the boat “occasionally” but later issued an apology to Mr Polanski, calling it an “inadvertent mistake”.

This led Conservative London Assembly member Neil Garratt and Labor leader Anna Turley MP to ask the City Hall to investigate whether Mr Polanski had breached the code of conduct.

But a decision by the GLA’s monitoring officer on Wednesday said Mr Polanski’s council tax position arose “solely from personal living arrangements” and did not bear “a sufficient connection with the member’s public role”.

“I have determined that no further action is warranted regarding this complaint,” monitoring officer Rory McKenna wrote.

“This is because the behavior complained of falls outside the scope of the law and the member is not acting in an official capacity.”

In his witness statement, Mr Polanski explained that he moved into the houseboat with his partner in August 2022, having previously lived in London as an “estate executor”; this was a living arrangement in which an individual could stay in an otherwise vacant building in exchange for “relatively modest licensing fees”.

“This was one of the few affordable housing options available to me in London at a time marked by economic uncertainty, austerity and significant cost of living pressures,” Mr Polanski wrote.

He explained that within the scope of these regulations, he paid a license fee, including municipal tax, to the relevant provider.

“Although unusual, this has become my normal experience of housing authority and associated household expenses,” Mr. Polanski wrote.

“I have personal experience with financial hardship and housing insecurity,” he added.

“Having experienced periods of economic hardship on a limited income, I understand first-hand the challenges many Londoners face.

“My previous living arrangements reflected these circumstances rather than an attempt to avoid financial obligations.”

At the time of his statement on June 10, Mr Polanski said he was still waiting for London Borough of Waltham Forest to confirm whether he owed council tax.

He also admitted that he did not make any further inquiries into the council tax situation at the time, but strongly denied that he had acted dishonestly.

“I readily acknowledge that I did not do further research into the specific council tax consequences of living on a narrowboat at that time,” Mr Polanski said.

“I have therefore apologized unreservedly for this inadvertent mistake. “However, I would like to state emphatically that it was not my intention to avoid council tax, evade legal obligations or gain any improper financial advantage.

“The lack of appreciation for the position arose solely from a misunderstanding of what was required in relation to an unusual and unconventional living arrangement,” he added.

Mr Polanski also promised to pay the full amount required if he is found liable for council tax. “Conversely, if it is determined that there is no council tax liability, I intend to make a charitable donation equivalent to what would normally be paid to a homeless charity, reflecting my commitment to public service and social responsibility,” Mr Polanski added.

In her complaint to City Hall, Ms Turley had also raised concerns that the matter could be pursued as a potential offense under section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, which bans local authority members who owe council tax from voting on council tax or budget decisions for two months or more.

But the monitoring officer said there was “no justification for the matter to be pursued as a potential crime or referred to the police”.

Mr Polanski responded to the allegation in his statement, writing: “I also strongly reject any suggestion that I knowingly participated in votes affecting council tax knowing that I owed money or was otherwise disqualified.”

Mr Polanski’s lawyers told the monitoring officer in a letter that the complaints were “vexatious” and “politically motivated” and amounted to “the type of ‘tit-for-tat’ complaint that the GLA complaints procedure identifies as inappropriate for investigation”.