Agenda item

Consideration of an item containing exempt information within the meaning of section 100I and paragraphs 5, 7 part 1 Schedule 12A Local Government Act 1972.

The Chair proposed to move into Part 2 in order for the motion of no confidence to be debated in full. He said the reasons for this were that councillors would be discussing legally privileged information and information relating to an ongoing investigation. He read the following formal motion as stated on the agenda:

Consideration of an item containing exempt information within the meaning of section 100I and paragraphs 5, 7 part 1 Schedule 12A Local Government Act 1972

Councillor Khan raised a point of clarification; for the purposes of good governance, should the motion not be debated in public if Members spoke in general terms?

The Chair responded to the point of clarification and said Council had a recommendation from the Monitoring Officer which would be voted upon.

Councillor Loughlin requested a recorded vote.

The Leader proposed the motion to move into Part 2. He said he would have been happy to have had the debate in public as it would have shown the motion to be nothing more than a political stunt. However, the Monitoring Officer had provided her advice, as well as Counsel’s advice, and he said Council had to respect their views.

Councillor Dean said Members should be trusted to conduct a debate in public. He had read his speech to the Monitoring Officer and there was nothing that could not have been said in the public domain. He found this offensive and challenged the proposal.

Councillor Lees asked Members to stop criticising officers in public meetings.

Councillor Khan raised a point of personal clarification and said it was about governance, not officers.

Councillor Lees disagreed and said Members had explicitly questioned the legal advice of the Monitoring Officer.

Councillor Dean was granted a right of reply; he said it was for officers to advise, and members to decide. Members were not obliged to accept that advice.

Councillor Sell said he had seen other motions of no confidence and they were held in public. He added that the Monitoring Officer had checked and given two speeches the “all clear”. He said it was a shame that the good sense of members was not trusted.

Councillor Merifield said the whole situation was saddening; a written record of the meeting would be available and councillors had been told that they needed to debate the matter in private due to legal privilege.

The Chair said he knew of three motions of no confidence that were taken in Part 2.

Councillor Pavitt raised a point of clarification and said, contrary to the reports in the press, the Uttlesford Independents’ Group were not signatories to this motion.

Councillor Isham said the issue of his membership had now been clarified and he apologised for any confusion caused.

The Chair moved to a vote.

The proposal to exclude the public and press was carried 18 for, 12 against with 2 abstentions.

RESOLVED that under section 100I of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 5 and 7, part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.