Greenwich Council have pushed through new rules that could limit citizens’ powers to hold their local politicians to account, despite public outrage.
Angry residents have told City News they feel the move was the result of an increase in questions about local campaigns.
At last night’s final council meeting of the year, opposition groups appeared to use delay tactics to prevent a vote on the measures.
The changes would see further restrictions on anyone putting questions to the council.
In future, no more than two questions can be asked by councillors or members of the public. They must be submitted one week in advance and with a 100-word limit.
Chaos in the council
The meeting began in good humour but quickly descended into a passionate debate, with Mayor Linda Bird begging members to stop heckling each other.
On four occasions, councillors called “division,” and a bell was rung for a minute or more.
Insults were traded, and a member of the public was thrown out of the chamber for continuing to speak about off-topic issues.
Ultimately, the vote landed at eight votes against the measures, 28 votes for, and one abstention.
‘A step back for democracy’
More than 1,500 residents have signed petitions objecting to the proposals, which were only announced eight days before the vote.
Lara Ruffle Coles, who started one of the petitions, said they would “reduce the ability of the general public and our elected councillors to scrutinise the decisions made by our council.”
Lara started a petition opposing the consititution changes.
“This is not a step forward for democracy, this is a step back,” Lara said, “and an affront to all borough residents who ask questions at council meetings.”Green Party councillor Lakshan Saldin said it was an “abuse of the system”.
“It means you can’t ask a particularly detailed question […] and they can answer it as ambiguously as they like or not at all […] and you’ve got no comeback on that.”
“So it’s really taking away a core tenet of democratic accountability,” Cllr Saldin said.
David Montieith, a local campaigner and Green Party candidate in the upcoming local elections, told City News he would be unable to ask relevant questions with this new time frame.
“The time that we have to formulate and present our questions has been lengthened, so we’d be asking our questions into the darkness.”
One of the petitions opposing the changes has gathered over 1,200 signatures.
Labour Council-Leader Anthony Okereke argued the changes are necessary because of an increase in complex questions and because other London councils already have these measures, or similar, in place.
“They argue it reduces accountability. I do not accept that. Accountability is not about unlimited volume. It is about effective challenge,” he said during the council meeting.
Both the opposition and the Labour party argued for a change to the current system.
But leader of the Conservative group, Cllr Matt Hartley said it was “a power grab”.
“Everybody in this room knows it. That’s why you’ve persisted till ten past midnight to try and force this through. You made three attempts to curtail a debate about good politics,” he said said.
The Labour group of Greenwich Council was contacted for comment.
Submitted Article
Headline
Short Headline
Standfirst
Published Article
HeadlineConsitution changes stifling democracy, Greenwich residents say
Short HeadlineGreenwich Residents Slam Controversial Change
StandfirstLabour Council Members go through with Vote Despite Public Outrage
Greenwich Council have pushed through new rules that could limit citizens’ powers to hold their local politicians to account, despite public outrage.
Angry residents have told City News they feel the move was the result of an increase in questions about local campaigns.
At last night’s final council meeting of the year, opposition groups appeared to use delay tactics to prevent a vote on the measures.
The changes would see further restrictions on anyone putting questions to the council.
In future, no more than two questions can be asked by councillors or members of the public. They must be submitted one week in advance and with a 100-word limit.
Chaos in the council
The meeting began in good humour but quickly descended into a passionate debate, with Mayor Linda Bird begging members to stop heckling each other.
On four occasions, councillors called “division,” and a bell was rung for a minute or more.
Insults were traded, and a member of the public was thrown out of the chamber for continuing to speak about off-topic issues.
Ultimately, the vote landed at eight votes against the measures, 28 votes for, and one abstention.
‘A step back for democracy’
More than 1,500 residents have signed petitions objecting to the proposals, which were only announced eight days before the vote.
Lara Ruffle Coles, who started one of the petitions, said they would “reduce the ability of the general public and our elected councillors to scrutinise the decisions made by our council.”
Lara started a petition opposing the consititution changes.
“This is not a step forward for democracy, this is a step back,” Lara said, “and an affront to all borough residents who ask questions at council meetings.”Green Party councillor Lakshan Saldin said it was an “abuse of the system”.
“It means you can’t ask a particularly detailed question […] and they can answer it as ambiguously as they like or not at all […] and you’ve got no comeback on that.”
“So it’s really taking away a core tenet of democratic accountability,” Cllr Saldin said.
David Montieith, a local campaigner and Green Party candidate in the upcoming local elections, told City News he would be unable to ask relevant questions with this new time frame.
“The time that we have to formulate and present our questions has been lengthened, so we’d be asking our questions into the darkness.”
One of the petitions opposing the changes has gathered over 1,200 signatures.
Labour Council-Leader Anthony Okereke argued the changes are necessary because of an increase in complex questions and because other London councils already have these measures, or similar, in place.
“They argue it reduces accountability. I do not accept that. Accountability is not about unlimited volume. It is about effective challenge,” he said during the council meeting.
Both the opposition and the Labour party argued for a change to the current system.
But leader of the Conservative group, Cllr Matt Hartley said it was “a power grab”.
“Everybody in this room knows it. That’s why you’ve persisted till ten past midnight to try and force this through. You made three attempts to curtail a debate about good politics,” he said said.
The Labour group of Greenwich Council was contacted for comment.
