"Scanner" challenge on council attendance records

Last week we reported criticism of the BBI after four members failed to turn up to a meeting of the Audit and Governance committee, causing it to be cancelled. Conservative Councillor Raymond Singleton-McGuire wrote to leader Richard Austin, whose response was to say "the meeting should have gone ahead but no votes taken. The minutes could then be voted on at the next meeting. This is standard practice but as these circumstances are so rare the Chairman & Officers were not familiar with this procedure."
The exchange has appalled our regular correspondent "Scanner" who writes:-
"Gobsmacked is not a word that I normally use, but when I read Oberfuehrer Austin’s reply to Councillor Singleton–McGuire’s complaint I felt like using far more descriptive phrases.
"A few years ago, the Labour government stopped the system where local councillors received a payment for each meeting they went to, including outside committees where they represented the council.
"Instead, they imposed a yearly allowance to be paid in full, irrespective of how many meetings a councillor attended.
"The effect of this, apparently, was the absence of some members from many more meetings than they had missed before.
"It also meant that, from then on, appointments to outside bodies also became difficult to fill.
Boston Eye reported the non-attendance by thirteen councillors at the recent Civic Awards evening and the four missing from the Audit and Governance meeting causing the meeting to be postponed.
"Papa Austin says that the postponing of meetings happens rarely.
"I wonder what the attendance record of our councillors has been over the last two years, especially where they sit on outside bodies?
"How many councillors can boast a 100% attendance record?
"I know that people have remarked on how few councillors attend church services and other public functions – unless, of course, food and drink are provided! That seems to make a difference. Am I being cynical?
"I digress.
"Papa Richard classed as 'standard practice' that the meeting should have gone ahead and no vote taken until the next meeting where the minutes of that ‘non meeting’ would be voted on.
"I think he should have been forced to take the training that all the new councillors turned down after they were elected in 2007.
"How can you have minutes of a meeting that has not taken place because it was not quorate and could not, therefore, legally, come to any decisions?
"Furthermore it must have been an important meeting to invite two experts, at great expense I suppose, to help the committee to interpret the subject under discussion and answer any questions asked.
"Is our leader expecting four members of 'his group' to vote on the few words that will appear in the (non –existent?) minutes without having the opportunity to ask questions and, maybe, have a greater understanding of what they are voting for?
"I would not be a happy bunny, either, if I was a council officer who had been described as ignorant of procedures at meetings, and it seems that all chairmen should join Papa and be trained properly before being allowed to preside over meetings, not dragged off the streets and shoved before a committee.
"Finally, we have been told time and time again that they are all independent councillors.
"They say that their only agreement is on the need for a bypass.
"If they regard themselves as independents, how can Councillor Austin be a leader and 'crack the whip' and insist they come to heel and obey him? - though I like Boston Eye’s reference to lapdogs. "

Scanner

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.