There are two excellent motions before the council next week in the meeting scheduled for 8th December at Millmead. One is proposed by a Labour councillor and one is proposed by a Liberal Democrat councillor. This should not be about politics - as you can see I quote a conservative MP in a moment. This is about local, transparent democracy.
Both motions seek to address the lack of transparency and accountability for the way that decisions are made (motion 9 & 10 on this link, also copied at the bottom of this page - http://www.guildford.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=10924&p=0 ). I intend to request permission to film the debate, so that it can be published here (don't worry, just the exciting bits!). This would help Guildford Borough Councillors to act upon the guidance from Conservative MP Bob Neill, the Under Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.
Mr Neill's e-mail to council leaders is below, and in it he says, "There are recent stories about people being ejected from council meetings for blogging, tweeting or filming. This potentially is at odds with the fundamentals of democracy and I want to encourage all councils to take a welcoming approach to those who want to bring local news stories to a wider audience."
Thanks Bob, I'll see what I can do!
(Stuff I've quoted from is below in full, for those of you who like a bit more detail...).
Motion 9 & 10:
9. NOTICE OF MOTION (B) DATED 28 NOVEMBER 2011
In accordance with Procedure Rule 7, Councillor Angela Gunning to propose and
Councillor Christian Gilliam to second the following motion:
“This Council notes:
(a) The declining public participation in Council meetings
(b) The recent changes the Council has made to the procedures for public participation
in full Council meetings
(c) The current procedures Surrey County Council uses to encourage public
participation at meetings.
This Council believes:
(i) That public participation in Council meetings is an essential part of a vibrant local
democracy
(ii) That public participation in Council meetings provides members of the public the
opportunity to scrutinise the Council’s policies
(iii) That it should do everything it can to facilitate simple and efficient procedures to
allow the public to participate at Council meetings.
This Council therefore resolves:
(I) To introduce a half hour Leader’s Question Time, where no notice of a question
needs to be given, to give the public the opportunity to scrutinise the Council’s
policies.
(II) To allow members of the public to submit motions to Council, for debate, up to 24
hours before the start of a Council meeting
(III) To introduce live streaming of Council meetings on the internet
(IV) To allow any member of the public to use recording equipment at Council meetings.” 3
10. NOTICE OF MOTION (C) DATED 28 NOVEMBER 2011
In accordance with Procedure Rule 7, Councillor Liz Hogger to propose and Councillor
Caroline Reeves to second the following motion:
“The Council notes recent events which have caused concern both to councillors and to
members of the public about lack of transparency in some of the Council's decisionmaking procedures:
(a) A decision to sell the Constitutional Hall (170 High Street) at auction was made on
delegated authority with no consultation with councillors other than the local ward
councillors, no public announcement that the decision had been made, and no
opportunity to call-in the decision for scrutiny.
(b) The Executive's decision to approve the preparation of a planning application for a
new bus station at Bedford Road car park was made on 20 October, even though
there was no mention of the bus station being discussed at that meeting in the
Council's Forward Plan published on 16 September.
(c) A member of the public asked a question in writing at Council and received a written
reply with no debate and no opportunity to ask a supplementary question.
This Council therefore agrees to review the Constitution in consultation with all the political
groups to ensure that:
(i) Decisions involving the disposal of significant Council assets are made in public at
an Executive meeting, and are subject to call-in.
(ii) Clearer descriptions of the items to be considered are included in the Forward Plan,
so that both councillors and members of the public have more time to consider the
topic and prepare representations.
(iii) Public involvement at meetings of the Council is encouraged, by measures such as
treating questions from the public in the same way as questions from councillors, so
allowing supplementary questions and comment from other councillors.
(iv) Consideration is given to any other proposals which may be made by councillors to
improve transparency of decision-making and encourage greater involvement from
the public.”
Here is the full text of the letter from Bob Neill to Council Leaders and Monitoring Officers in February 2011:
As part of the Government's transparency drive I want to highlight the importance of your council giving citizens the opportunity to access and experience their local democracy using modern communication methods. It is essential to a healthy democracy that citizens everywhere are able to feel that their council welcomes them to observe local decision-making and through modern media tools keep others informed as to what their council is doing. The mainstream media also needs to be free to provide stronger local accountability by being able to film and record in meetings without obstruction.
online film, social media and hyper-local online news they should equally be open to 'Citizen Journalists' and filming by mainstream media. Bloggers, tweeters, residents with their own websites and users of Facebook and YouTube are increasingly a part of the modern world, blurring the lines between professional journalists and the public.
There are recent stories about people being ejected from council meetings for blogging, tweeting or filming. This potentially is at odds with the fundamentals of democracy and I want to encourage all councils to take a welcoming approach to those who want to bring local news stories to a wider audience. The public should rightly expect that elected representatives who have put themselves up for public office be prepared for their decisions to be as transparent as possible and welcome a direct line of communication to their electorate. I do hope that you and your colleagues will do your utmost to maximise the transparency and openness of your council.
I do recognise that there are obligations on whoever is filming or publishing information - be it the council itself or a citizen or mainstream journalist - under the Data Protection Act 1998. But I do not see these obligations as preventing access for journalism. Nor are there grounds for any council seeking to obstruct a citizen or other journalist from processing information. The Information Commissioner's Office has told us that:
- In the absence of any other legal barrier to comment, publication, expression and so on, the Act in and of itself would not prevent such processing of information.
- In the majority of cases the citizen blogging about how they see the democratic process working is unlikely to breach the data protection principles.
- In the context of photographing or filming meetings, whilst genuine concerns about being filmed should not be dismissed, the nature of the activity being filmed - elected representatives acting in the public sphere - should weigh heavily against personal objections'.
Moreover there are within the Act itself exemptions from the data protection principles which might apply in the circumstances of the citizen journalist. The first exemption relates to processing of information for journalistic purposes (section 32), the second for the processing of information for domestic purposes (section 36).
In short transparency and openness should be the underlying principle behind everything councils do and in this digital age it is right that we modernise our approach to public access, recognising the contribution to transparency and democratic debate that social media and similar tools can make.
I copy this letter to your monitoring officer given their responsibility for advising on your council's procedures and decision-making arrangements.
Bob Neill MP
