‘Death of democracy’ - Public outrage over council's question time crackdown
‘Death of democracy’ was the cry at Calderdale Council this week after members of the public were ejected following a controversial crackdown on oral questions.
Council leader Dan Sutherland said the cabinet received a ‘joint record’ number of questions over the future of the Mixenden Activity Centre, Halifax, and the potential closure of Colden Junior and Infant School, near Hebden Bridge.
But there were verbal protests from audience members when he announced these questions would be dealt with ‘en masse’ rather than allowing the usual 30-minutes of oral public questioning set out in Calderdale Council’s own guidelines.
The Local Democracy Reporting Service calculates public question time lasted around 10 minutes before Coun Sutherland ejected members of the public due to the heckles that erupted after he declined to answer a question about the Queens Road Neighbourhood Centre in Halifax.
Coun Sutherland warned the questioner Mr Ahmed to stick with the wording of his written question, but then called an end to the question without saying why.
The LDRS compared Mr Ahmed’s pre-submitted written question with video footage of the meeting and found he followed the wording verbatim (after being warned not to deviate) yet was still cut off by Coun Sutherland.
Calderdale Council did not address this specific finding.
Mr Ahmed’s second oral question, which appeared substantially the same as his written one, also went unanswered before he sat down and labelled the process ‘the death of democracy’.
Though the livestream audio was cut, and later the video, the LDRS was in the room as audience members heckled Coun Sutherland’s approach – ultimately leading him to have the public ejected before some were allowed back in.
As the ejection unfolded, Labour group leader Coun Adam Wilkinson claimed Reform cabinet member Coun Darren Commons told him “well orchestrated”.
Coun Commons did not respond to a request for comment.
Labour leader Coun Wilkinson has now accused Reform of “arrogance, division and political games” and showing “contempt for the people of Calderdale”.
‘It’s disgusting and frustrating’
Last month, Reform Mayor Andrew Tagg said the administration “value[s] transparency, public engagement and the right of residents to observe local democracy in action”.
But parents at Colden – which is facing closure after this year’s intake of zero and an estimated £300,000 repair bill – were left ‘absolutely flabbergasted’ by the recently elected Reform-led council’s approach to public scrutiny.
Speaking to the LDRS outside the Town Hall, they collectively refuted Coun Commons’ assertion about a Labour plot and decried the ‘shutdown’ on oral questions.
Julie Thorpe, 68, a former chair of governors at Colden, said: “We are perfectly capable of orchestrating this ourselves. We have never met Coun Wilkinson.”
On the curtailed questioning, she said: “We are absolutely flabbergasted. We came here hoping that our questions would have been answered and we could not access information. The prepared statement did not touch on our questions. It included information we could already access.”
Tom Newsome, 36, a parent of two children at the school, said he went through a back and forth with council officials to shorten his question about the contentious £300,000 repair estimate, but he was still prevented from asking it and did not get an answer.
“It’s disgusting and frustrating, there’s no words for it. It’s a complete lack of courtesy to people who have attended,” said Mr Newsome.
Kat Molesworth, 43, a university worker with one child at the school and another hoping to join, said: “I didn’t expect them to give the response we wanted, but we thought at least they would give responses.”
Patrick Walker, 42, a public servant with a girl in Year 2, said the written statement failed to answer his question about rural school designation, while criticising the council leader for his attitude.
He said: “I have seen council meetings before and I have never seen a member of the public spoken to like that bloke [Mr Ahmed] was shut down… I think it was disgraceful how members of the public were shut down before they could put their views forward.”
Megan Gault, 33, who has a seven-year-old daughter at the school and a young girl hoping to join next year, said it was a “hideous” experience having worked hard to create a pool of questions at short notice.
Her father, Jim Gault, a 77-year-old retired stonemason who has put multiple generations through Colden, also felt his time had been wasted and could not recall attending a council meeting like this in his lifetime.
Councillor Margot Puddepha said she was “upset and shocked” at Reform’s “scandalous” handling of public questions.
“They just changed the rules,” she said. “The democratic process we had faith in has been so badly damaged by this disgrace of a meeting.”
Liberal Democrat leader Ashley Evans said: “I was not impressed by the leader’s abrasive and supercilious treatment of members of the public who asked questions leading them to, understandably, be frustrated and angry.
“I have some sympathy with their reaction. Although, being pragmatic, if their reaction had been more measured, they may have had more impact. But that is, perhaps, an experienced councillor speaking.”
After publication, a Calderdale Council spokesperson said the question time slot is not required under the council’s constitution nor the access to information regulations and it is “within the gift of the leader” to assess the best use of time.
They said previous leaders had modified the sessions based on time constraints with questions not read out and responded to in writing.
The spokesperson also said “some” questions about Colden were addressed, adding that “all the issues” raised in questions about Mixenden Activity Centre were addressed by the statement and detail in the cabinet report.
On the removal of members of the public, the council said Coun Sutherland acted in response to “ongoing disruptive behaviour” and under rules allowing intervention where people disregard rulings, behave improperly or obstruct council business.
Asked whether residents had been given a meaningful opportunity to scrutinise decisions and hold the cabinet to account, the spokesperson replied: “Yes.”