At the Policy and Resources Meeting last Wednesday, I stated the facts, as I believe them to be, pertaining to this issue in some depth, but for the benefit of those Aldermen and Councillors who were not present I would offer a brief review:
On Sunday, the 11th of January a meeting of six Aldermen and Councillors was convened and took place at the home of Alderman Kinghan.
The six people attending were all members of this council and were also members of the Finance Sub Committee.
Myself, the Mayor and Councillor Thompson were not informed or advised that this meeting was to be held, although we three were the only other elected members of the F.S.C. Neither was any officer informed of the meeting, or present at it.
I believe that the greater part of the matters discussed at this meeting pertained to the business of the F.S.C. In fact, I believe those attending the meeting went through a number of Core Estimates already published, line by line, and potential savings were discussed.
However, in addition and in particular, the costs of the proposed Hollywood Leisure Centre and the proposed Rathgill Community Centre were examined, the theme under discussion being the effect on the forthcoming level of rates resulting from either the completion, postponement or shelving of these projects.
I have already stated that I consider the fact that this meeting, comprising of six of the nine elected members of the F.S.C., was called in this manner, i.e. outside the normal procedures pertaining to the convening of meetings of this Council, or at all was discourteous to the Mayor, Councillor Thompson and myself. I have also said that it constituted a disservice to the Officers of this Council, and to the Town Clerk and heads of Departments, who were not present, either to answer questions, or to receive feedback on at least part of the F.S.C.'s thinking on these matters.
Given that the Town Clerk, on more than one occasion, has offered to convene as many meetings of the F.S.C as any or all the members felt necessary, including on Sundays, if so desired, I find it all the more inexplicable that this meeting took place outside normal procedures and channels!
I believe that in convening this meeting, the Member or Members responsible acted outside the democratic process of this Chamber, and that by continuing with the meeting, all those present contributed to a greater or lesser degree, to an attempt to usurp the proper functions of the F.S.C. and those of the policy and Resources Committee. Furthermore, Members may well take the view that the meeting in question was an attempt to subsume the avowed and minuted will of this Council itself.
Let me make this clear: I do not complain that I was not told of this meeting until after it had taken place, or that Alderman Kinghan, for whatever reason, did not invite me to her home. The latter is her right, and if she so chooses to withhold her hospitality from the Mayor and Councillor Thompson as well for any reason I must respect that right.
but in fact, had I known of this meeting before it took place, and been invited to it, and been informed of the circumstances under which it was to be held, I would not have attended.
My actual complaint is not that I and two other members of this Chamber were excluded on this occasion, but that a secret convention of the major part of the F.S.C. took place at all under such circumstances, i.e. outside the due process and protocols of this Chamber.
At the F.S.C. meeting on January 13th, at which I first raised this matter several of the six members involved in the Jan 11th meeting expressed the view that all members of this Chamber like all other citizens were perfectly entitled to meet informally together to discuss Council business; to lobby one another on various issues; or to meet privately with officers , constituents or advisers on matters pertaining to the furtherance of the interests of the Borough and its residents. I agree with them on that point. How else would we do business, in fact? Of course we all meet to plot and scheme together, for the betterment of our electorate, or sections of that worthy body. We also meet together in groups, large or small to implement or determine the policy of our respective political parties towards council matters. This is not disputed by me nor, I trust anyone else!
The fact that, when we do so effectively and subsequently win Full Councils approval for our particular line, we call it "successful lobbying", and the fact that when we don't win our point, we mutter about "secret meetings" is not relevant here!
Such matters are just a part of the game which everyone in this Chamber plays to a greater or lesser degree, and with greater or lesser degrees of skill!!
But that is not what happened at Alderman Kinghans home on Jan 11th. What happened there was that a meeting of two thirds of the elected Finance Sub Committee of this Council, to the exclusion of one third of that duly elected body took place!
At that meeting I believe among other things, that a strategy was evolved and tactics were discussed to scupper the Hollywood Leisure Centre and the Rathgill Community Centre. May I remind members at this stage that the full Council had already approved the latter and the Policy and Resources had recommended the former, in both cases well before the Jan 11th meeting!
I would ask this Chamber, what is the point in the Members electing a F.S.C. in paying allowances and mileage to all the members of that Committee to attend the regular meetings and involving the valuable time of senior officers of this Council, if an irregularly convened group of six Members then take it upon themselves to subsume and usurp the clearly designated functions of that elected Committee?
I believe that this meeting at Alderman Kinghans house went well beyond simple "lobbying" and in its convention, form and content, that it constituted a threat to proper, democratic advisory function of both F.S.C. and the Policy and Resource Committee, and that it also cocked a "snook" at the very authority and terms of reference of North Down Borough Council itself.
When I brought this matter up at The Policy and Resource Committee recently, Alderman McKay in the Chair, permitted me some licence in the mater of putting it on record. I thank her for that. At the time although she did not (quite correctly, I believe) permit a general discussion on the matter, she did however, express the view that this sort of thing had been happening since the year dot, and while not signifying approval for that situation, was of the opinion that nothing could be done about "secret meetings".
Whilst I agreed with her former point, I do not believe that we must continue to tolerate a resignation to acceptance of such practices in the future. I, for one believe that we as a Council, should press for rectification of this particular matter, and in the future, that Members of this Council should conduct all Council Business in a proper, democratic manner, within an ethical framework of the highest possible standards!
It is also my belief that, of the six members who attended the meeting in question, not all are equally culpable of the sin of subsuming the functions of other Council bodies. I believe some, perhaps the majority of the six, did not realise what was happening until they arrived at the meeting, although they all did in fact remain present and take part in it, they to a greater or lesser degree, uncomfortable with the way in which the meeting was convened and proceeded. No doubt they will speak for themselves on that matter.
The Member or Members who should bear the principal responsibility for this affair are those who actually called the meeting. I await with interest to see whom, if anyone, will hold up their hands to their won individual contribution to that particular part of the issue.
It is of course, not for me or any individual Member of this Chamber to decide if this matter did or did not constitute irregular or improper behaviour on the part of those concerned. It is certainly a matter for this Full Council to rule on the matter of whether a "sin" was committed in convening or attending this controversial meeting. But all these six members of the F.S.C. did in my view commit one unpardonable political sin, THEY GOT CAUGHT!
Perhaps the proper course for the future is that members might wish to consider the appointment of a Sub Committee to look into the ethics of such issues such as this, by means of a Notice of Motion or otherwise.
But for now, I would like to propose that this Council formally register its disapproval of the 11th January meeting which was hosted by Alderman Kinghan and attended by the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Mrs Smyth, Alderman Wilson and Councillors Lennon, Farry and Chambers, in that it took place in the form that it did.
Furthermore that this Council does urge all its Members to be more circumspect in the future concerning their convention of or attendance at irregular meetings, and to adhere more closely to generally accepted democratic protocols concerning such matters. Councillor Ernie Steele.