THANKS to the coverage given in last week's Review, attendance at the District Council's Scrutiny meeting on April 30 was increased by 500 per cent so that there were five persons present in the public gallery rather than myself as the usual lone figure. Although the written answer to my question was only to be expected, common sense prevailed during the debate on trips to Gloucester and London for commitee members and the recommendation was defeated.
This may appear a small victory for, as the chairman pointed out, the sums of money involved were not large. Nevertheless it is an important milestone in holding the council to account. Who better to scrutinise what our council tax is being spent on than ourselves? If Scrutiny Committee members need to visit other authorities in order to improve their scrutinising skills, one could ask what they are doing on the committee in the first place. Council taxpayers pay the piper and should call the tune.
The Review has shown what can be achieved through publicity allied to persistence. It is an encouraging start, but let's have 50 people present at council meetings and dozens of questions asked. If someone prefers to remain anonymous then I am prepared to ask the question on their behalf (telephone 01600 715273).
There were two other small victories on Thursday night. The chairman assured me that the right to question is not under threat and he indicated that the system is open to review. I have emailed him to suggest that members of the public present should be allowed, under certain constraints, to ask questions and comment on the debate as the meeting proceeds, as elected members who do not sit on the specific committee already do.
Democracy is a fragile flower and its nurture is in our hands. – Daphne Pearson (Dr), Redbrook.