Birds, budgets and transparency

A fiery four-hour meeting sees Sefton councillors spar over transparency in the sweltering heat

Last night’s meeting at a sweltering Southport Town Hall for Sefton‘s first full council gathering since the May elections appears to have been relatively well attended by the public as well as councillors alike.

Labour members may have found themselves a little relieved that councillors had turned out in force, at least their own anyway, because one aspect of last night’s meeting that was tangibly different than previous is that these days the ruling Labour group’s majority hangs relatively by something of a thread.

Thanks to May’s elections the Lib Dem ranks have swelled, there’s a Green group now rather than just a solitary councillor, the return of the Maghull independents means they could comfortably put forward a six a side team, there’s a smattering of Reform and a single unaligned independent, all sitting alongside a Labour group now comprised of just 36 councillors out of the 66 in the borough.

Given these new political demographics, as we reported yesterday, it wouldn’t necessarily take much for Labour to lose control of any given vote. As it went down last night, though, this didn’t happen. Labour‘s majority impacted the outcome of all votes when it came to a series of motions that had been submitted by councillors from across the borough’s political spectrum.

Along the way and amidst a packed agenda during a meeting lasting nearly four hours, councillors discussed a range of issues, including many focused on the north of the borough, where the meeting was taking place this month. Amongst them, questions about the Marine Lake Events Centre (MLEC) amid a request for councillors to approve a further £33m investment underwritten by the council on top of the £20m already provided for the now over-budget centre (total cost over £100m), which as the leader Cllr Marion Atkinson said, is the ‘largest single development‘ the council has ever brought forward.

‘The biggest decision we’re going to make’

Questions from a number of Lib Dems centred on oversight, scrutiny and transparency around reports over the project and led to testy words from council leader Marion Atkinson. Cllr John Pugh accused the council of effectively ‘hiding‘ reports from opposition councillors by not opening them up to scrutiny around the £33m events centre decision, railing against what he called a ‘secrecy’ that leads to ‘mistake after mistake’.

He said ‘I don’t know how many people in this room are used to borrowing £33m or expect to be around 40 years later when it’s all repaid but it’s a fairly hefty sum’, which works out at around ‘600 aviaries’ referring to a highly controversial issue repeatedly mentioned in yesterday’s meeting around the planned closure of the Botanic Gardens aviary.

Cllr Pugh said approval of the extra £33m was ‘the biggest decision we’re going to make this evening’ yet ‘shockingly’ there are no dedicated, detailed reports for councillors to consider. He said cabinet had the benefit of a ‘detailed 200 page document from which they could quiz officers’ but this had not been made available for opposition members to inspect. He said the director of legal services would tell any inquiring councillor ‘no you can’t have it’.

‘Members would like to know about some of the details we can see’ he added, giving a list of areas around which he would like to seek assurances, ‘We in the council are entitled to know what has and what is going on’ he said, asking for a ‘proper report’ for councillors to study.

This led to a fiery response from council leader Marion Atkinson who accused Cllr Pugh of besmirching officers by suggesting things were not being done properly, something she said she found ‘really insulting’ and ‘not acceptable’. She then criticised the time the Liberal Democrats were in charge of the council and said the cost increases for the ΜLEC were due to the ‘very same reasons costs are rising all over the country’.

Atkinson said the council did a lot to ensure ‘robust financial assessment and assurance’ using experts and long-established companies to provide assurance and ‘maximum oversight’ as well as scrutiny from regional and national level.

Cllr Pugh’s complaint was echoed by fellow Lib Dem councillor Ian Brodie Brown who spoke about other Merseyside boroughs where processes were more ‘transparent‘, referring specifically to Wirral, which has a committee-led system that means there isn’t a ‘concentration of power in a few hands’ and where all councillors get ‘full access’ to reports.

He said councillors were being left to make a decision without oversight of the same reports the cabinet have seen, with the information being withheld on the grounds of ‘commercial confidentiality’, referring to recent comments from former labour leader Gordon Brown about the use of commercial confidentially and who Brodie Browne said had ‘called it out.’

He also railed against what he described as a lack of ‘transparency’ from Sefton’s Labour, calling on the council to ‘open up the books’.

‘You choose to hide that information’ he said, which prevents opppostion councillors having ‘proper scrutiny of these big decisions’ to a round of applause from some within the chamber.

Cllr Pugh added, ’robust challenge is not a bad thing’ adding ‘secrecy … is the best way probably of making repeated mistakes again and again’.

’That would be okay if it was your own money, do it how you like‘ he added, ‘but we’re talking about Sefton council tax payers money being spent over the next 40 years’.

The birds or the budget?

The aviary was a subject brought up by councillors several times over the course of the meeting.

Cllr Shaw submitted a question about the FAQs published the council over the aviary closure, saying the answer about consultation - that it was an operational budget decision so no consultation was needed - and a further answer that public opinion wouldn’t change the factors involved in the closure was ‘arrogant and not what I would expect of local government’.

Cabinet member Jen Williams replied that as an operational budget decision no consultation was required, echoing comments already made in the FAQs.

A motion was also submitted by Cllr Daniel Lewis to assign money from the proceeds of the sale of a lodge at the gates of the Botanic Gardens towards match funding for a Heritage Lottery bid as part of a bid to safeguard the aviary.

‘Every one of us knows in our heart of hearts this isn’t difficult to do. If we want to save the aviary, we can save the aviary’ he said, adding that he understands the position of local Labour MP Patrick Hurley is that he is also in favour of finding a way to retain it.

Calling on councillors to ‘come together’ to back the aviary, his speech was followed by a round of applause across the chamber and from the public gallery.

In response, Cllr Atkinson stated the motion was ‘misleading’ and ‘very disappointing’ because the council do not assign the proceeds of asset sales by geographical area. She said instead the money was always ‘shared’ across the borough.

The council leader claimed the motion was ‘politically motivated and orchestrated to deceive people’. Her speech was interrupted on several occasions by calls from the public gallery by residents who had gathered over the agenda item.

Atkinson also spoke at length about the closure of the aviary, saying ‘it was not about money despite the Liberal Democrats making everyone think it is’. Instead, she said ‘this is all about the welfare of the birds‘ to cries of ‘load of rubbish’ from the public gallery.

Atkinson said the ’cages are far too small for them’ describing the aviary as the ‘legacy of an era that didn’t care about the welfare of the animals and the birds’.

‘None of these animals were put on earth for the pleasure of human beings to look at them in confined and unnatural spaces’ the leader added, stating instead they need to ‘fly freely’.

Atkinson also spoke of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds advocating for birds ‘to be in their natural habitats’ claiming it was ’simply inhumane’. Referring to the Lib Dems’ own national policy positions against caged birds, she said local opposition councillors had ‘sniffed a bit of political expediency’, followed by cries by Atkinson of ‘shame on you’. This led to further disruptions by members of the public and one of several interventions by mayor Jen Corcoran calling for quiet in the gallery.

‘Vote with your conscience not how you‘ve been told to’

Cllr Leatherbarrow from Maghull Independents spoke of his support for the Lib Dem motion, saying it was a ‘sensible motion’ and calling on Labour councillors to ‘vote with your conscience not how you‘ve been told to vote’. He added, ‘let’s be honest, this isn’t a welfare issue at all it‘s to save money’ to a round of applause.

Lib Dem Cllr Simon Shaw said the problem with Cllr Atkinson’s comments is that while she said this decision isn’t about money, her cabinet member had confirmed she’d approved the FAQs which made clear this was an ‘operational budget decision that was to make savings to the sefton Council budget’.

‘This is nothing other than a smokescreen’ said Cllr Brodie Brown, claiming this ‘wasn’t done openly’. He said ‘you sneaked it in the back door’, adding ‘I’m surprised you’ve not moved an amendment praising the Labour party’.

Green leader, Cllr Neil Doolin spoken in response to Atkinson’s discussion of bird welfare by referencing reflections from a Green member about work they’d done at Bristol zoo. He spoke of the challenges of birds who have lived in captivity simply flying free in the way Cllr Atkinson had described.

‘These animals would completely freak out if put into larger enclosures’ he said, adding for animals born into captivity ‘sudden freedom or change is not the correct approach’ saying it could ‘cause stress’.

Doolin added that its sudden closure ‘would be devastating for these animals regardless of what anyone thinks about captivity’.

Cllr Lewis concluded the debate saying if it’s not about the money ‘give them the sixty grand then’ pointing to members of the Botanic Garden Community Association, who help look after the birds, and were sat in the public gallery. He claimed Atkinson had effectively accused the volunteers of ‘animal abuse’ adding ‘this is a rescue centre’ and accusing the Labour-run council of not listening.

The vote was taken by recorded vote, meaning each councillor’s name was read out before they voted for or against the motion. With all Labour councillors present voting against, the motion was defeated with the final result 32 against and 27 for.

before you fly free …

If you’re new to the Monitor, welcome. We’re a tiny local independent public interest newsroom operating on a non profit basis. 

Our aim is to keep you informed about the decisions that affect our lives on Merseyside. We don’t do paywalls here, all our content is open access, and you can sign up - it’s completely free - and get an email or two off us a week. It also means you can comment on the site.

What do you think about last night’s meeting? Let us know, we love to chat!

Ideas for stories we should be looking at? Drop us an email at themerseymonitor@outlook.com or message us on 07442 402 023.

The Monitor is entirely and only funded by our readers. If you can spare a quid or two, we’d love your support.

You can do that here:  https://www.merseymonitor.com/#/portal/support

You can also set up a regular donation of any amount of your choosing, your own tailor-made subscription if you like, here: Donate

Thanks for having a nose, it already makes you part of what we’re doing here at the Monitor. We appreciate you supporting local public interest journalism on Merseyside