Resident groups and councillors have criticised changes to the Greenwich council constitution which they argue will stifle opposition and scrutiny.
The amendments, which were passed on Wednesday, mean residents’ queries will be restricted to 100 words and have to be submitted seven, instead of five, working days in advance.
This comes amid increased pressure on the Labour council over recent months relating to the introduction of controversial Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs), and campaigns against the closure of local play areas and the Maryon Wilson Animal Park.
Eleanor Restall, 50, chair of the West Charlton Residents Association, said: “The proposed changes to the council’s constitution could stifle critical dialogue, diminish transparency, and weaken the democratic process.”
Speaking to the Londoners, she said: “It feels very much like they are just trying to push ahead with some very unpopular policies.”
The council approved two new LTNs despite opposition from 80% of residents, according to community group The Coalition for Liveable, Equitable and Accessible Roads (CLEAR).
Greenwich Council has denied “airbrushing” public criticism from its reports concerning the implementation of scheme.
After the changes were approved, CLEAR declared on their Facebook page that: “Democracy in Greenwich is officially dead.”
The council meeting was extended until 12.40am as opposition councillors employed tactics to impede the debate in the hope of delaying the decision until after the upcoming election on May 7.
Councillor Matt Hartley, the Conservative leader, said: “This is a permanent change to the way this council is being governed being rammed through at the eleventh hour before an election by the majority group, it is not only political thuggery, it is a complete abuse of power”.
All eight opposition councillors voted against the motion.
Changes to the council’s call-in procedure have also been passed, making it harder for controversial decisions to be challenged by councillors.
Three councillors representing two or more different parties are now needed for an issue to be raised, up from two councillors who could both represent the same party previously.
Relating to the changes being implemented without public consultation, Restall said: “It’s very typical of this council to give us such limited time. They’re very sneaky with their timings.”
Restall, in partnership with CLEAR, launched a petition opposing the changes earlier this month which has garnered over 1,400 signatures.
In response, council leader Anthony Okereke said: “The Council is facing the challenge of achieving the right balance between ensuring robust participation by both Councillors and the public with the need to conduct essential business during its Full Council meetings.
“Over the last few months there has been a significant increase in the number and complexity of questions.
“At January’s meeting there were 98. This makes it incredibly hard for Full Council meetings to function properly and consider and debate important matters for residents.”
Okereke added that the changes are in line with other London boroughs. Nine other councils set a word limit for questions, and 24 impose question submission deadlines of more than five days.
The Greens are expected to challenge Labour’s long-standing control of the council in the upcoming elections.
Featured image credit: Eleanor Restall
Join the discussion