Town Council meetings are made up of two parts. Part I is open to the public: anyone can attend, listen, take notes, record, and even speak if they’d like to.
Then comes Part II, when everyone is asked to leave. There’s even a ritual announcement that always makes me feel like I’ve joined some sort of secret society:
“That in accordance with the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act 1960, the public and press be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of agenda item(s) [insert item number(s)] on the grounds that publicity would be prejudicial to the public interest by reason of the confidential nature of the business to be transacted.”
But what does that actually mean? And who gets to decide what’s “prejudicial to the public interest”? If you don’t yet know what’s going to be discussed, how can you agree (or disagree) that it should be hidden?
Previous Part II
Looking back through Redruth Town Council’s Part II agendas, both from my time and earlier, I’ve seen items such as:
- The new staff handbook
- The council budget & precept
- Organisational review update
They’re so vague it’s impossible to know what was really discussed. And honestly, shouldn’t the budget and precept, literally how taxpayers’ money is spent, be debated in the open? Six months ago, as a resident, I wasn’t trusted with this information. Now, having taken the oath as a councillor, I suddenly have the right to know. That feels odd.
The other strange thing about Part II is the lack of records. You can’t take notes, and only the outcomes of votes are minuted, not the conversations or the detail of motions. When I submit a motion in advance, I’m required to include quite a lot of information. Yet those standards don’t seem to apply once we step into Part II. And if they do, that information doesn’t seem to be made public.
Whole staff reports, for example, are hidden. Is that always necessary? Or could generalised information be shared publicly, with only private or personal details contained in a separate confidential document?
It makes scrutiny difficult. And I can see why, to the public, it feels more like information is being hidden than safeguarded.
Redruth Civic Centre vs The Houses of Parliament
It’s also worth putting this in perspective. Everything voted on in the House of Commons is debated in public. The last closed session was in 2001, and that was an accident, during a debate on terrorism. So is there really anything at Redruth Town Council more secret or sensitive than matters of national security?
Yes, some details should stay private: personal names, legal matters, salaries, business rents. But beyond that, the need for Part II should surely be rare. With no overarching regulator for town and parish councils, no one is really watching how often it’s used.
And that raises the bigger question: what should local government be showing more openly? How money is being spent? Who is accountable? What the council’s focus and ambitions are for the town?
I’d love to know what you think. What kinds of debates would make you come along to a council meeting, sit in Part I, and take an interest?
Leave a Reply