At the next meeting of the council on the 28th of July 2009 the Deputy Chief Executive, at the request of the leader, will present a report seeking to change the times of monthly council meetings from 5pm to 10:30am, with a guillotine of 4 hours long maximum.
The majority of the labour supporting councillors don't work (in fact at least one has never worked). The majority of the opposition have full time jobs and will find great difficulty attending meetings that will interfere with both halves of a normal working day. For the leader to suggest changing the times of meetings at this point in the life of the current council can only be seen as an attempt to stifle democracy.
Leading Labour councillors did not know about this until recently yet rumours have been circulating for some time amongst the opposition that this was on the cards. The last meeting on the 30th of June was exceptionally long, finishing at 11:15 pm but this was certainly unusual and the agenda was ridiculously long, maybe deliberately so. Meetings are often 2 hours or less.
An email was received from an opposition member on the 1st of July saying that there were rumours that this was going to happen. This being the case it seems unlikely that the decision to move the meetings to the morning was taken after the marathon meeting on the day before the 30th of June (11:15 finish). It is far more likely that the decision was taken earlier and the meeting Agenda was deliberately made long. The agenda for this meeting was exceptional, 29 Agenda Items, many of them with lengthy reports. The meeting before had 17 items, only a couple of those with reports. The one before had 19 items, no lengthy reports. Never has a meeting had so many items and so many lengthy items on the Agenda.
Is the inclusion of 29 items in the last meeting another one of those amazing co-incidences? After years with a full labour majority with meetings starting at 5pm, and everyone was happy, there is now something like a balance of power. The majority of the opposition have other jobs and the majority of the leading group supporters only do councillor work. The proposal to change the council meetings to 10:30am comes at the latest the day after the very exceptionally, predictably long meeting! Hmmm!
IF YOU THINK THIS IS WRONG contact your councillor NOW and try to attend the meeting on Tuesday the 28th at 5pm!
UPDATE
At the meeting on the 28th of July the 4 hours guillotine idea was withdrawn by the leader before the debate but the proposal to change the meeting times was supported by the "Usual 23" and got through. See Minutes here, page 13
See a report from Ian Williams on the Peoples Voice Website here on what happened at the meeting.
Comments from people of all opinions are welcome here.
Sunday 26 July 2009
Is This The Last Nail in the Coffin of Democracy!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
The current councillors put up in the May 2008 election knowing that council meetings took place at 5pm. If they now find difficulty attending or paying attention at meetings at the times they agreed then they should have thought of this before they became councillors.
To seek change for their own convenience at the risk of others not being able to attend meetings is wrong.
My prediction is that the labour whip and "the leash of the SRA" on the Famous Five will get this passed with the usual 23 21 vote. It will be a very sad day for democracy in Torfaen but it will be a tremendous boost for opposition councillors in the next election.
Visit our website for comments
www.peoplesvoicetorfaen.co.uk
My own personal view is that where possible the arrangements should mean people with jobs can be a councillor.
I think in general terms this is of benefit to the council, councillors and democracy. We need local politicians working in the local community.
My understanding from this post is that they have changed the meetings SINCE the election, without that being made clear prior to election?
I am not sure I swallow the 'Cabinet vs. Opposition' narrative you present to be honest, primarily because your burden of proof seems to be based on 'most of the opposition work, the Labour lot dont'.
More New Labour fascism. Quelle surprise!
Dear "Sweet and Tender Hooligan"
My assumption 'most of the opposition work, the Labour lot dont' is broadly true but my freedom of information act enquiry to find out which councillors work other than as a councillor was refused because
"We are withholding this information on the basis of the exemption in Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act as the information sought is personal data as it relates to individuals. We consider the disclosure would breach the Data Protection Act. To comply with the Data Protection Act disclosure of personal data must be fair and lawful and meet one of the conditions in Schedule 2 of the Data Protection Act.
We have concluded that the disclosure would be unfair as the individuals concerned would not expect this information to be released to others and we do not consider that your interest in seeking the information outweighs the rights freedom and legitimate interest of the individuals concerned."
I note that on the councillor details section of the Torfaen Website there is a blank "Biography/CV" section. Why?
I believe only one labour councillors has an outside full time job and one of the independents who always support labour has his own business. Otherwise I think none of the 23 members of the labour supporting group, including the 3 Plaid and the other "independent" work, although I invite anyone to correct my information. There is at least one lady member of the 23 who has young family commitments, but judging by their ages, not many.
I know many of the non "labour group work", I believe most. They will find it more difficult to attend meetings in the day, as will most members of the public, particularly as a 10:30 start, with a break for lunch, will involve taking a full day off work. I believe that this is the intention behind the change of meeting times and I justify this partly as follows...
I have an email from one of my councillors concerning the change of meeting times. He is a cabinet member and the labour whip. The email makes clear that the change to day meetings is in retaliation for the opposition extending meetings by asking questions and challenging decisions (which some might think to be one of the roles of opposition members).
At a labour group meeting before the full council discussed this at least 3 of the labour councillors did not want the meeting times changes but a free vote was not allowed, the labour whip and of course, the "leash of the SRA" ensured the 23 voted for the change.
If you wish to see a copy of this email or require more information please let me know
I would be very interested in seeing that email.
Please can you get in touch via the email address on the website?
From another source I can now detail the numbers of councillors of the various parties and groups that work full-time outside of being councillors.
Labour of 18 councillors only one has an outside full time job.
Plaid has 3 councillors, none have a full time job. One of them gave up their job after receiving the chair allowance following the 2007 election, although that person said that they did not know there was any allowances involved in being a councillor when they became a candidate.
Of the two independents who always vote with labour one owns his own business and one gave up his job after the 2007 election.
So of the labour supporting group, (all 23 receive SRAs) all 23 of whom voted for the change in the times of council meetings from early evening to mid morning / lunch break / early afternoon (therby completely spoiling a whole normal working day) only one is employed full time (by a public body) and one owns his own business.
Of the 5 conservative councillors 3 work full time.
Of 2 lib/dems 1 works full time
Of 3 peoples Voice 2 work full time
of 9 councillors in the Independent Group 5 work full time, including one self employed.
Fred Wildgust works for himself and the Mayor, Tom Huish does not have an outside full time job.
So of the 21 non-labour group members 13 work full time. None of this group voted to change the times of meetings.
To quote from the aforementioned email ...
"we should all recognize that part time Councillors are not able to contribute fully to the running of the Council effectively."
So one labour councillor at least is not contributing fully to the running of the council!
Frazer,
I think , with respect, you have made a different argument here.
The fact that other Councillors work or not is not the point I was making, please read it again.
“I am not sure I swallow the 'Cabinet vs. Opposition' narrative you present to be honest, primarily because your burden of proof seems to be based on 'most of the opposition work, the Labour lot dont'.”
The burden of proof lies in your leap of faith, your ‘proof’ could well be coincidental, it might not be some massive conspiracy. I don’t know, as my original post said, and as someone hoping to stand for council, I would be against making the role only for those without other jobs.
The question I have is this – why should people believe you any more than those you accuse?
Can you confirm that the Council deliberately changed these arrangements to harm those who work? You haven’t done so, in my view yet – although that is not to doubt you per se.
Hi S&TH
I have received a freedom of information reply about the backround of the vote and I have sent of a couple more queries to the council.
As I said I have received emails from my councillor and spoken to another labour councillor about this. I was at the June meeting, which lasted until 11:15, understandably as it had an exceptionally long agenda,longer than anything I have seen in a year or more of council meetings.
I heard rumours about the change in council times months before this report came out from concerned, working, opposition members.
I have read the agenda, report and the minutes of the meeting of the 28th of July. (please read these!)
Everything I have read and heard indicates that the labour group think that daytime meetings will lead to shorter meetings (ie less discussion), and in the full knowledge that things will be more diffcult for councillors who work.
Remember that 21 of the 23 people who voted for the change has a council income of about £22k per year and another has an income of £18k. Only two work, some of the others consider being a councillor a full time job.
The 10:30 start is possibly the most difficult time for working members and working members of the public to attend. Instead of an average say 3 hour meeting lasting three hours it will span the lunch period, at least an hour, so it will take 4 hours plus travelling and unless you work in Pontypool then a full days work will be lost. You certainly won't be confident on returning to work that day.
At a labour group meeting three councillors voted against the change in times but it was obviously a political decision so the labour whip was employed and the usual 23 voted for the leaders proposal.
Watch this website for a more details and yes, a personal opinion or two on this matter in the form of a report. If you wish to contribute please get in touch.
If you are interested in becoming a councillor then you need to attend a few council meetings to see what happens. Very enlightening but ignore Fred Outburst, he is not a typical opposition member. You will quickly see how frustrating it must be an opposition member when all decisions are made behind closed doors, democracy and discussion are in most cases cosmetic, the usual 23 vote the way they are told. After a few meetings I think you will agree a change in the system is called for.
I do not think there is a plot to incumber the opposition members by moving the the council meetings to 10.30am.
My belief is that it stops the inconvenience of councillors having their evenings interrupted by having to attend. In other words, they have indulged themselves.
What else would you expect from a "Rotten Borough?"
As far as I am concerned, the situation whereby labour hold group meetings, and decide what they will, or will not, vote for or against, is illegal.
The stipulation is that all councillors must vote on the issues without having declared one way or the other. How on earth can they do this when they have already discussed and agreed the action to take in their labour group meeting.
Ian
You say The stipulation is that all councillors must vote on the issues without having declared one way or the other.
Where can I find out more about this, ie were is it stipulated? how can this tie in with, for example, a councillors manifesto saying they are against a development, will they then be excluded from voting on that matter?
This stipulation was used by the council to exclude councillors who had spoken out against Blaenavon Leisure Centre closure from discussing and voting on the closure, which seems very undemocratic and prevented them from representing the views of their constituents.
Frazer,
Ian appears to make a very different claim to you, do you care to come back on that? As it has confused me further.
The point is that you only have your opinion, no real hard evidence. “Shorter meetings (ie less debate)”, is subjective, yet you offer that as some unquestionable gospel.
I am a member of a political party, needless to say I am not sure I agree with this websites salient viewpoints. Will have to respectfully decline your invitation to contribute.
You can find my blog via my profile.
Marcus
Marcus / S&TH
Please read all the backround information and decide for yourself (I will let you see copies of relevant documents if you are interested). If by chance you agree with either Ian's claim or my "subjective" opinion might you then agree with both of us that the decision was wrong?
As a working member of the public would you find it easier to attend a meeting at 5pm or 10:30 in the morning?
Frazer
What I expressed was my opinion based on my knowledge of the individuals involved. Your reasons/opinions could be more valid than mine.
My using the word 'illegal' was possibly a little strong. Each councillor - so says; Appendix 1- 5(a) of the Code of Conduct - must not come to pre-determined decisions without listening to all arguments (my words).
I say again; "how does this square with the labour group going through the agenda of council meetings to decide how they will vote?
"As a working member of the public would you find it easier to attend a meeting at 5pm or 10:30 in the morning?"
Neither as it happens, but that is by the by i suppose.
It is my opinion that the change of time is to restrict opposition attendence. The Labour/Plaid coalition have come close to losing a vote sometimes, when one of theirs is otherwise engaged (pulling pints at Glastonbury is a recent example of Plaid Councillor Fiona Cross)
Plaid continue to vote with Labour in every vote.
Plaid are laughed at by the Labour group & come the next election, will be disposed of. They will have cooked their goose with the general public because of their turncoat behaviour.
I voted for Plaid Cllr Rees BECAUSE he knocked my door & told me we needed to get the Labour group out of power. He then manouvers Plaid into receiving paid jobs for supporting Labour. DISGRACEFUL.....it has & will not be forgotten. EVER
It shows the rubbish standards this whole joke of a website has when they hold up an anonymous comment as a cause for an elected councillor should respond to.
This comment could have been made by anybody, it could have been made by the people behind this website, we have no way of knowing. If a constituent has a grievance, the councillor can be contacted leaving their name and contact details. It is not democratic to assume that this website should demand a response from Councillors based on unverified comments on a blog.
This website speaks for the authors behind it only, not the people of Torfaen.
Dear Torfaen Voter
One absolute guarantee I can give you is that the comment you refer to was not written by the people behind this website nor do we know where it came from! However, if you critisise this comment for being anonymous, and yet do not give your own name, how can we take you seriously?
The comment was made by someone and in the interests of free speech I will not remove it. Similar comments have been made before, on this website and in the Argus. I have invited a reply from the Plaid Leader, not demanded it. I believe it would be unfair not to invite or allow him to comment.
Over to you, are you prepared to reveal who you are?
The point is that I am not calling for a response from a Councillor. You are taking upon yourself to be some white knight, when in fact you are merely talking for yourself.
Your advice to that person should be to do what every citizen can demand, a response from their democratic representatives. If they have a grievance, they can make it known properly.
They do not need the help of a hysterial website such as this.
Dear Torfaen Voter
You offer no opinions on the subject of this thread, or indeed any other subject mentioned on the website, you just seem to want to deny people, including myself, the right to make our opinions public.
Feel free to praise the democratic processes in Torfaen and defend the actions of the leading labour/Plaid/Independent Coalition; they have in the most part chosen not to defend themselves, either here or in the Press.
Do you really think all the concerns of the voters of Torfaen can be resolved by writing to their councillors? Do you think it wrong for anyone to publically challenge the actions of a councillor or a council? Are you happy with the way TCBC is run?
Can I also ask "not a plaid supporter anymore" if he has contacted his councillor on this matter, and what sort of reply did he get?
“Can I also ask "not a plaid supporter anymore" if he has contacted his councillor on this matter, and what sort of reply did he get?”
Which you should have done from the very start. I don’t defend anyone, I don’t know anyone involved, but many people in Torfaen are fed up of this whining and bleating by an obsessive pretending to talk for anyone other than themselves.
If you have such a big problem with the current crop, stand yourself, put up or shut up.
I suggest and request that you go to this thread http://torfaen4us.blogspot.com/2009/09/torfaen-democratic-forumdiscuss.html if you wish to continue this subject, leaving this thread for those that want to discuss the changing of meeting times.
Alternatively all those "people in Torfaen (who) are fed up of this whining and bleating", including yourself, are perfectly entitled not to visit this website! Bye!
Post a Comment