Southwark Council tries to ban people talking about what they’ve already talked about

Our place to talk – an independent website for supporters of the Liberal Democrat party in the UK.

The most-read independent website by and for Lib Dem supporters. Not paid for by trade unions or millionaires.

Advert

Southwark Council tries to ban people talking about what they’ve already talked about

By Mark Pack | Sun 17th October 2010 - 8:55 am

Follow @markpack

Liberal Democrats in Southwark claim the council is £26 million pounds worse off because of decisions the Labour-run body has taken over a regeneration scheme for Elephant & Castle.

This figure has been the subject of political debate, it’s been mentioned in the council, it’s been mentioned in the press and it’s been mentioned online.

So what happened when Liberal Democrat councillors tried to put the figure in a motion to be debated at the council? The council said no – the figure is secret and can’t be mentioned.

As London SE1 reports:

A Southwark Council spokesperson said: “On the advice of the monitoring officer we removed commercially confidential information from public papers.”

Lib Dem councillors say that they believe that the censorship is politically motivated.

“This is an outrageous attempt by Labour to stop Liberal Democrat councillors speaking the truth,” says Cllr Geoffrey Thornton.

“The amount Labour lost through their incompetence is already in the public domain and for the council to try to maintain the fiction of secrecy is utterly ridiculous and pointless.

Read more by Mark Pack or more about geoffrey thornton or southwark council.
This entry was posted in Local government, London and News.

Advert

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Name *

Email *

Website

Comment

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Most Read

Op-eds

Mathew on Monday: “We need to be bold” (Mathew Hulbert)
As a party we must be better defined for the 2029 general election (Chris Bowers)
From national averages to local realities: inequality in our communities (Tom Walker)
We do have a two tier system, Part 2 (Neil Hickman)
A Federal Britain: 3. Fiscal Federalism and a complete constitutional settlement (Iain Donaldson)

Advert

Recent Comments

Peter Hirst
Entering a race implies usually a commitment to win it. The idea should be not to win a hyporthetical AI race but to find the best compromise between using it w...
Peter Hirst
You might get more volunteers if it was clearer that they have influence over who is approved and selected for Westminster seats compared with the Westminster o...
Peter Hirst
You don't mention our so called independent nuclear deterrent. There is no reason why we can't merge it with France's. Why on earth do you need two nuclear dete...
David Evans
The one thing that this article shows is that it is impossible to establish a strategy that makes us clearly different from the other parties if we stick to our...
Peter Hirst
To underpin and solidify a federal devolved structure there must also be the accompanying infrastructure. To prepare for this larger regional governance our edu...