Ain't Misbehaving? County councillors, manly chests, doors slamming and foul language
Councillors rebuked for their conduct by their own chairman
A tale of two county council meetings…
Part 1: Doors slammed shut, foul and abusive language, support for alleged terrorist groups: just an average meeting of Kent County Council?
If you have ever wondered what county councillors actually get up to when they attend meetings, then perhaps you should take a peek at a recent gathering for an invaluable insight into their behaviour.
It is not usual to offer such a recommendation but events at two recent full council meetings deserve to be in the public domain. The first meeting took place in July, and as full council meetings usually do, sparked some argumentative, not to say testy exchanges.
So, why was the meeting in July so combustible?
For that, you need to flip the county council calendar forward to September 18, the date of next full council meeting.
The Reform Party chairman of the council Cllr Richard Palmer was back in charge, after an unforeseen diary clash that meant he could not be present for the afternoon debate in July.
He had taken the trouble to watch a webcast of the July meeting he had missed and was not impressed by what he had seen.
And he had decided that members needed a rap on the knuckles for failing to abide by the conduct required of them at public meetings.
Cllr Palmer said the conduct of some was so poor that it breached the Nolan Principles that public officials are required to heed by.
Chairman of Kent County Council Cllr Palmer criticises members over their behaviour
“To be quite honest, the behaviour of some members fell short of the Nolan principles; there was a lack of respect, not just to members but to members of the public. It is members of the public who voted us in and we are leaders within our community. We owe it to members of the public to listen and to challenge reasonably and fairly.”
He was particularly underwhelmed by councillors who had “slammed the doors” of the council chamber as they left the meeting in high dudgeon and of “using foul and abusive language.”
“That is the kind of language you hear in the pubs on a Friday night. Certain language only inflames the public,” he said.
Members needed to consider how they came across to the public. “All I ask is that they show respect and put [their] our case firmly but fairly without resorting to abuse of anyone.”
Like a recalcitrant schoolchild, members listened in stunned silence - not something that happens often at County Hall.
Seconds out, round two:
Had the message about being on their best behaviour got through? Not exactly.
The leader duly delivered an account of what the authority had been up to and the opposition parties questioned and challenged the account. The protocol of these meetings is for the leader to have a final right of reply.
In her formal response, Cllr Kemkaran prefaced her speech with a remark that she hoped that the opposition party leaders had “got that off their tiny little chests.”
But before she could get much further, the Labour group leader Alister Brady had jumped up to complain she was breaking an all-party agreement “not to be patronising to one another.”
The leader replied that she would correct her remark with the hope that “they had got it off their big, manly chests…honestly I was beginning to feel like an agony aunt”.
The dispute then turned to a scarf being worn by Green county councillor Stuart Jeffery which the leader said possibly appeared to be in support of a terrorist group Hamas.
Not surprisingly this prompted a furious reply from Cllr Jeffrey, who demanded a retraction and apology, saying it was “bang out of order.”
This in turn prompted an intervention from the chairman of the council Cllr Palmer, who urged the leader to “reflect” on her comments which could be wrongly interpreted.
He reminded members the constitution of the council included a requirement not to question the motives of councillors.
Cllr Kemkaren said she was always happy to reflect but did not retract the comments.
Does all this mean anything more than the standard knock-about you get in most councils?
Maybe, maybe not.
Either way, councillors insulting one another at public meetings is not the most edifying of spectacles.
And voters might baulk at the idea that the suggestion a reform package will help end this ya-boo Punch and Judy style of politics