In anticipation of today’s full council session, I recently wrote to Salford City Council to ask permission to make an audio recording of the day’s events. The city’s solicitor replied and answered that, no, audio recordings were not allowed – citing various reasons, including the possibility that the audio recordings could be “maliciously” edited.
Other councils such as Gloucestershire County Council, Haringey Council and Canterbury City Council have their own in-house audio recording systems (connected to the chamber’s already existing microphone loop) and provide downloadable audio recordings (in MP3 format) on their council’s own websites.
Why can’t Salford do the same? The apparent answer is cost. I was amazed to get an answer so quickly – apparently the city solicitor was aware of the high cost when he replied “operation of recording comes at a not inconsiderable cost both in terms of capital to buy and install the equipment and income with the cost of an operator and the cost of publishing the results to fund.There has been no provision in the budget for such expenditure.”
OK – if that is the case, then why not move the council meetings from the ridiculous start time of 9.30am to a more family friendly 7pm? The latter timeslot is currently when Bury Council holds their own council meetings.
Salford’s Labour leadership have consistently resisted the sensible alternative (to move council meetings to a more convenient time for those of us that have jobs) – which is why I suggest the release of audio recordings of full council (and perhaps other meetings too).
Salford Council do employ officers to take written minutes, but these are often laden with errors and omissions – as was proven today when virtually the first order of business was to make a correction and add in answers that were omitted from the written record of previous council. The minutes cannot be relied upon as a true record of events at council meetings, which is why audio recordings should either be allowable or even better, the council should make it’s own recordings and grant free access to them by whoever wishes to listen. Either that or change the start times of the session to a more agreeable slot.
Today I am launching my own campaign for Greater Access to Salford Council meetings. You can sign my petition here.
Join me in asking Salford City Council to be more open and honest about the democratic workings of our city – I believe we should be proud to do so.
There is no incentive for the Labour Councillors to vote to move meetings to the evening, when so many of them are in receipt of extra allowances.
Of the 36 Labour Councillors, they have 10 Cabinet members, 8 executive support members, 5 (of 6) scrutiny chairs, the chairs of licensing and planning, the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor, who all receive special responsibility allowances. That’s 27 of 36 receiving extra money on top of their basic allowance.
By contrast, just 3 of the 24 opposition Councillors receive special allowances direct from the Council – the leaders of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat groups, and the solitary opposition scrutiny chair.
I should add for completeness that outside bodies also pay special allowances, and these break down as 6 Labour (2 Fire, 2 Transport, 1 Waste Disposal, 1 Police) and 2 opposition (1 Fire, 1 Transport).
We’ve said consistently as a Conservative group that as a start the executive support roles should be scrapped. They have no job description, don’t seem to do anything much for the 6 grand they pocket, and exist purely as patronage posts in the gift of the leader.
I am unaware the exact number of councillors with daytime jobs, I know some do have them and some do not. I suppose it could we worth attempting a Freedom of Information request to determine the number of councillors who do not have jobs outside their political duties.
With regards to other meetings, you are quite correct – they usually take place during “office hours” and it can be incredibly difficult to attend important meetings such as planning and licensing.
It’s almost as if the council is afraid the public will see how Labour have stifled democracy here in Salford, taking unfair advantage of their majority to force anything they want through the decision making process.
Are Labour afraid that if the voting public could see how the Labour-led council abuse their position, things might change next year at the ballot box?
Steve M – You state that moving the time of the meeting is something that the Labour leadership has resisted. Is this anything to do with the fact a higher proportion of the Labour councillors don’t have jobs outside their council roles? I’m curious to know exactly what some of the councillors do – are they self-employed, work for a particular company or do nothing at all – is there anyway of finding out?
Another angle to this is that most of the other council meeting also take place during normal working hours. I know a few years ago that a local pub wanted to extend its hours for the new Licensing act. Many residents objected but it was very difficult for most of them to attend the meeting as it involved taking time off work, arrange child-care , etc.
I’m all for more accessible time and openess for the main councils meetings and also meetings which local people need to attend at set at more convenient times.
Good post Steve, I agree with you.
Council meetings should take place in the evening.
I see no reason why the Council itself should not make a publicly available audio recording of full council meetings. The cost argument against is a nonsense; it would not cost much to buy and install the equipment necessary to record meetings and it is a legitimate cost for something important (unlike pink rinks etc).
The meetings are open to the public so there is no issue of confidential business being compromised as confidential business is not conducted at full council.
If the council recorded the meeting and put the full recordin on its own website there would be no issue of ‘malicious editing’.