Bad Tempered Debate on Transparency Gives Clear View of Bad Blood

Published on: 10 Oct, 2018
Updated on: 12 Oct, 2018

Cllrs Tony Rooth and Paul Spooner

A bad-tempered Guildford Borough Council (GBC) meeting revealed the bad blood that remains between the Tory leadership and Cllr Tony Rooth (Ind, Pilgrims) who quit the Conservative Group at Millmead in May to become an Independent.

Today (October 10, 2018) Tony Rooth said: “In 15 years on the council, I have never seen such disregard and disinterest from the council leadership, and many councillors, in letting our residents get involved in council decision making and know what’s going on.

“I was ridiculed for requesting more council democracy, transparency and accountability to avoid bad decisions like the “Pop Up Village” which has lost £1.1 million. We need residents to help get it right – councillors don’t have a monopoly of good ideas.”

Council Leader Paul Spooner (Con, South Ash & Tongham) responded: “I was hoping that Cllr Rooth would reflect on his motions, amendments and comments and upon reflection understand why many of his former colleagues, as well as opposition councillors, reacted in the way they did. Clearly and sadly that has not happened.”

In a long council meeting, punctuated by verbal spats, things came to a head in a debate on a motion put forward by Cllr Rooth asking the council to declare support for the Local Government Transparency Code. The motion called for the council to agree to “the establishment of an external independent review of the council’s compliance with the code and its principles, reporting back to Overview and Scrutiny Committee and then the Executive.

The “Secret State” Times editorial from Saturday, October 6

In the ensuing debate, the verbal sniping was not limited to exchanges between the leadership and Rooth. Cllr Susan Parker (GGG, Send) was also singled out for criticism.

Rooth opened with a dig at Guildford Borough Council’s deputy leader: “Transparency, as I am sure Cllr Furniss knows, in a governance context, is honesty and openness. Transparency and accountability are generally considered the two main pillars of good corporate governance.”

But, Cllr Rooth said, his residents complained that they did not know what was going on at GBC and went on to refer to an article published on Saturday in the Times entitled “Secret State” which had listed examples of local councils preventing the normal reporting of their proceedings. He wanted Guildford Borough Council to avoid being seen in the same light.

Cllr Angela Gunning (Lab, Stoke) was concerned about the lack of time given to prepare for the debate. She said: “I appreciate Cllr Rooth’s concerns but I feel that the detail of the background that has been given to us, and I am sure it is all good stuff, but I’m trying to read it in an order paper at quarter past nine at night while we’ve had heavens knows how much other business to do and I feel I can’t do this justice.”

“I don’t think discussing it at this time of night, off the cuff, off an order paper, is the right place to do it and I think it should come straight to a scrutiny committee for consideration to look at.”

Cllr David Reeve

But David Reeve (GGG, Clandon & Horsley) said he had: “…a sneaking suspicion that we are much less transparent than we appear on paper. Let me give you a few examples: Dongying and the twinning arrangement. That got a very long way down the track before anyone was aware of it even, I understand … that one of the members of the twinning working group said that the first they had heard of it was at the same time as everyone else at the council.

FoI [Freedom of Information] requests… there is a suspicion out there that FoI requests are not taken seriously and we use the facilities provided in the legislation to turn them down. I myself have submitted two FoI requests, one before I was a councillor and one after.”

Both had been turned down. The first in Cllr Reeve’s view, “…totally contrary to the provisions and the published guidance by the Information Commission”. The second, according to Reeve, was only accepted when, as a councillor, he had “…made a fuss about it. I think there is an instinct for a lack of transparency.”

Cllr Susan Parker

Cllr Reeve’s party colleague Susan Parker (GGG, Send) thought Tony Rooth’s motion a “superb initiative”. She said: “I think we have an obligation to have democracy in public. Unlike Parliament, she said, GBC held a lot of meetings of committees and working groups behind closed doors.

“The decisions of the council are often perceived, rightly or wrongly, as opaque.”

The public: “…have a right to see what we are discussing… and we have an obligation to them, to show them what we are thinking and actually discuss things in public. We shouldn’t be just rubber stamping something that is presented to us.

“The officers do a good job, they work hard, I am not criticising the officers but I am sure that as far as the officers are concerned quite often the elected representatives are an irritation but we are here to be an irritation that is our job. We are here to ask questions. We are here to throw a light on what’s going on. That’s why we are elected.”

Cllr Matt Furniss

Next to speak was Deputy Leader Matt Furniss (Con, Christchurch). He opened by saying that he thought some of Cllr Parker’s comments were “outrageous” adding that he thought the council officers “do an excellent job and any denigration of that is frankly appalling”. There was some head scratching. Cllr Parker had praised the officers.

Incensed, Parker interrupted, saying: “As a point of order, I didn’t criticise the officers in any way shape or form.” But Cllr Parsons, as mayor chairing the meeting, did not redress the issue, and simply urged the angry councillor to be quiet by repeating her name.

Furniss continued saying that GBC already complies with the Transparency Code, referred to in Cllr Rooth’s motion and that the council already appoints independent auditors to review compliance.

Cllr Richard Billington

The Deputy Mayor, Cllr Billington (Con, Tillingbourne) then decided to weigh in. He said: “A less charitable man than me might think he had sat through the last 20 minutes listening to a load of sanctimonious tosh. Cllr Rooth said he is under pressure from his residents who are asking, “What is going on?” Well, they are so concerned we have got an empty public gallery… if they are all so concerned how come they are not beating them off at the door?

“To use the term “Secret State,” I think is disgusting. There’s no Secret State here and I think everyone here knows that.

“We don’t have direct democracy in this country… We have representative democracy. You are here to make decisions guided by wider interests of the borough and your own residents which if you are doing your jobs properly you should know.”

Council Leader Paul Spooner, having mentioned that he agreed with what his Executive colleagues had already said, added: “I believe we do try our level best both as officers and as members, not just the Executive but as the majority group, to try and be as open as possible, with the majority, if not all councillors, to make sure they are all broadly aware of what’s going on.

“What we should try and do is always be open and on that basis why on earth has this come as a motion for review at the last minute today?” He concluded by suggesting it would have been more sensible for the matter to have gone through one of the council committees first.

A request for a recorded vote having failed, the councillors voted by a show of hands. The motion was heavily defeated, the only votes in favour coming from the two-member Independent group and the three-member GGG group.

Further reports on yesterday’s full GBC meeting will be published over the next few days. Please check back.

Share This Post