What happened next was that the Leader , aided by his erstwhile deputy and abetted by the rest of the massed Tory ranks, curtailed any debate about the proposal before any was really allowed to take place. Using the constitution and rules of debate, before anyone else was given the opportunity to add to the debate (the Labour Group leader was given the opportunity to speak briefly), Cllr Daubney moved that the motion be put and Cllr Long seconded, meaning no further debate could take place.
Hardly a democratic way to behave when bringing forward a proposal which restricts the opportunity for democratic input from those opposed to the administration but I suppose not surprising given the past history of this autocratic group.
For the record, my speech against the proposal is included below:
Thank you Mr Mayor
As many members will know I have grave concerns about the proposal to change the proportionality of Cabinet Scrutiny Committee and the effect that this will have on the credibility and accountability of this council as a whole at a time when these could be described as fragile at best.
However, having looked at this proposal very carefully (wanting to make sure that there was no clause included proposing exile to a Gulag in the event of dissent), I am minded not to propose a specific amendment to that particular section of the report - but to ask members to consider voting against the proposal as a whole.
The reason for doing so is that it seems like madness to me to propose and make changes to the panel and scrutiny structure, ahead of a planned review which will take place this summer - something that appears to be acknowledged in the report insomuch as having created two panels out of the existing REC structure, they will continue to meet as a single body, being chaired on an alternate basis until the review has concluded.
Further, it is worrying that this proposal has been brought as a response to a peer review that has not been widely shared amongst members (new and old) and as a proposal that appears to have been rushed through as some sort of supreme executive power, without being given the benefit of comment, scrutiny, development etc of the councils existing structure of panels, cabinet & cabinet scrutiny before landing in front of members at this council meeting.
Whilst it should be acknowledged that the party opposite have increased their majority in this chamber at the recent election, there are still enough councillors in opposition to allow for input into policy development and proper scrutiny, reflecting the views of our borough's residents who did not vote for conservative candidates at that election.
Following the meeting, one prominent Tory asked me whether I 'really believed that we would allow a debate on a Civic evening', referring to the fact that the Annual Council is usually a ceremonial event, dedicated to the election and appointment of the Mayor for the forthcoming municipal year. My answer was and is simple... 'If you do not want to debate the proposal at a Civic evening, do not put the proposal forward at a Civic evening', further proof, if it were needed, that this administration is not interested in serving the principles of democracy.