You may have read that the new leader of Nottinghamshire County Council has banned councillors from engaging with the Nottingham Post, a well-respected local newspaper.
This follows earlier moves by other Reform-controlled councils to cancel nearly all council meetings, denying opposition councillors the opportunity to hold the administration to account.
There have, I must admit, been many occasions when I have felt aggrieved about what to me has seemed like ill-informed or unfair criticism, whether in the press or in the council chamber. But the system is not designed to be easy for the ruling group; it’s intended to provide the checks and balances – and the accountability – that enable well-informed and effective democracy to function.
If the press print things that I think are wrong, or misrepresent the situation, I have the option of trying to put the record straight. Better still, I can try to avoid misinterpretation by explaining actions in advance in a way that answers possible lines of criticism. The response to what I and others might perceive as unfair press coverage is not to refuse to engage, as in Nottinghamshire, but to learn the lesson and communicate better in future.
The same is true of questions at council meetings. The most important part of council meetings is when members of the public and their elected representatives have the chance to ask questions of executive members.
If the thinking behind the question is flawed, or the question contains factual inaccuracies, the councillor providing an answer can explain the true situation. If the ruling group has erred – and all of us make mistakes – we can seek to provide a remedy.
Reluctance to allow the press to do its important job, or to expose the administration to scrutiny by opposition councillors, strikes me as a sign of weakness – of a lack of confidence in your ability to run a council.
Far from refusing to engage with the press, I try to make myself available for comment whenever possible and devote time and effort to explaining why the council is doing what it is doing. My executive colleagues do the same. If the local press is starved of political news, it becomes less effective at exposing abuse of power, or uncovering innocent error, or even reporting the good things that a council is doing. And in the absence of regular items in the press on the council, the public loses interest in local elections, and the whole system begins to lack legitimacy.
My colleagues and I, whenever possible, vote to extend the time allocated for public and councillor questions in council meetings to ensure that everyone has the chance to have their say. We are not afraid of scrutiny, nor of criticism. If the questioners are mistaken, we can explain why; if we are mistaken, we can take steps to put things right.
Good councils need an engaged local press and vigilant and active opposition councillors, with the opportunity to ask questions. Without these vital checks and balances, things can all too easily go horribly wrong.
Cllr Stephen Conway is leader of Wokingham Borough Council
