Questions asked at full Council meeting 20 April 2004 click here The Responses will be published after the event

Questions asked and responses given at full Council meeting 2 Mar 2004

On the order paper, Cass Mann asked:
"In condemning gay and lesbian relationships in the Richmond & Twickenham Times (RTT) on 21 November 2003 by writing "God did not originally make two men to love or complement one another, neither did he create two women to love and complement one another", Cllr Hilary Dance breached the following sections of the Council's Members' Code of Conduct: - Part 1, General Provisions, Scope: 1.02 a, b and c; General Obligations - 2.02 a, b and c; Bringing the Authority into Disrepute - 4.01.
"What measures does the Council intend to take to deal with her breaches of the Members' Code of Conduct which she has clearly done by publishing her letter as a Councillor using the Council's official address and email communication pathway?"

Cllr Arbour replied:
"Any alleged breach of the act is a matter for the standards board, recognising that Cllr Dance's personal and religious beliefs have been interpreted by some as homophobic and she wrote to apologise and emphasise that she is not homophobic."

In a supplementary, Cass Mann asked:
"Had Cllr Dance written as an individual I would not be here, but as her letter is signed off as Whitton Ward councillor of Richmond Council and she used the council's email pathway and address, it is in the area of council business. It is still a council matter as to whether a councillor will be disciplined within the code of conduct. Is there not a breach still? She wrote not in her personal capacity but as a councillor."

Cllr Arbour replied:
"I believe I have answered the question already."

On the order paper, Cass Mann asked:
"The Council's Chief Executive was quoted as commenting on Cllr Dance's statement in RTT on 19 December 2003: "We will not discriminate on grounds of race, gender, gender reassignment, marital status, being a lesbian or gay man, age, religious beliefs, HIV status or disability", referring to the Council's equality and diversity policy.
"As Cllr Dance's aforementioned homophobic comments are in clear breach of this policy, what measures does the Council intend to take to deal with her breach of this policy if the policy is to actually mean anything at all?"

Cllr Arbour replied:
"I have discussed this matter with Cllr Dance and explained how such remarks can be interpreted. There is to be further training on equalities so that members know about the danger of inadvertantly causing offence."

On the order paper, Cass Mann asked:
"My friends, colleagues and I have experienced a recent increase in verbal abuse and threatening behaviour since November 2003, where the perpetrators now claim to be acting in accord with Cllr Dance's aforementioned homophobic statement. Two friends who intended to register their partnership in a commitment ceremony at the Council's Registry Office in York House are now too terrified to do so in case Cllr Dance's adherents target them, their family and guests on the day.
"What measures does the Council intend to take to ensure Cllr Dance's comments are formally, officially and specifically rebutted by the Council in order that potential registration partners are not placed under threat and, furthermore, that the Council's gay and lesbian residents are not afraid any more to walk the streets as a result of Cllr Dance's homophobic statement?"

Cllr Arbour replied:
"The council's policies are clear. To suggest that people are afraid to walk the street is hard to believe. The council will however soon have some firm evidence as to the views of transgender people, gays, lesbians, and people in same sex relationships, who live and work in the borough. The community safety partnership is currently carrying out a survey to feed into our community safety strategy."

In a supplementary question, Cass Mann asked:
"I object to the response being that it is 'hard to believe'. I find that deeply insulting. The question is that is it not directly a result of the letter written by Cllr Dance that people are still apprehensive? There needs to be a dissociation by the council. Is the council prepared to formally dissociate itself from the remarks of Cllr Dance finally? Is it prepared to do this?"

Cllr Arbour replied:
"I have already answered the question."

Questions asked at full Council meeting 20 April 2004 The Responses will be published after the event.

An extraordinary outcome resulted from the meeting on 20 April of the full Council which is detailed below. The Leader, Cllr Arbour, made the same scripted statement in response to each of the three questions, firstly regarding Cllr Cranfield-Adams' breach of the Council's Members' Code of Conduct, which was that the matters raised in my questions "should be referred to the Standards Board for England (SBE)", which they are being.

He further stated that Cllr Cranfield-Adams' breaches and contraventions of the newly adopted Equality & Diversity Policy & Strategy (EDPS) were not a matter for the Council but for the SBE. When I raised my supplementary question pointing out that the EDPS was not in the remit of SBE to consider, he declined to comment further. It therefore was confirmed that the EDPS has no disciplinary or penalty clauses built into it to control elected members, despite assurances given to me that there were by the Chief Executive, Gillian Norton, at the last Cabinet meeting on 23 March where I raised this issue in my formal statement to Cabinet.

Cllr Arbour made the astonishing admission that, whilst recognising that Cllr Cranfield-Adams had communicated as a Councillor, using the Council's official email address, email pathway and geographical address, he was "writing in a personal capacity" and that this was not a matter for the Council to consider. Therefore it would appear that any Richmond Councillor can write anything they wish to using the Council's official email address and pathway, as well as geographical address, and neither they, nor the Council, will be held responsible for the content of their communication. In real-world terms, this abysmal practice would nullify all good business practice as well as British libel law and would be unacceptably sharp business practice.

It seems that Richmond Council is determined to undermine democratic process and make itself and its elected members entirely.unaccountable to the borough's residents and electorate.

Q1 “Writing to the Richmond & Twickenham Times as a Richmond Councillor on 12 March, using the Council's email pathway and York House geographical address, Cllr Cranfield-Adams denounced "some from the gay community" in Richmond for their "vindictiveness and spite" in seeking to have Cllr Dance "hung, drawn and quartered". As his claims are demonstrably untrue and unjustified, he is in clear breach of Council's Members' Code of Conduct in the following sections under Part 1, General Provisions: (a) Scope - 1.02 a, b, c; (b) General Obligations - 2.02 a, b, c; (c) Bringing the Authority into Disrepute - 4.01 .

Will the Leader confirm that these allegations, issued as an official Council communication, are entirely without foundation or merit and that they are withdrawn immediately by Council (as, otherwise, Council are party to and implicated in his abuse of the local gay community) and if this simple and direct remedial action will not be undertaken, could evidence be made public for these allegations being justified?”

Q2 “Once again, writing as a Richmond Councillor on 9 March to the editor of Online Communities, using the Council's email pathway, Cllr Cranfield-Adams threatened the Online Communities website with "the removal of your entire website" for having published a cartoon depicting several Councillors, including himself, as members of the Village People. This, he claimed, defamed the Councillors as "the sty le of (the cartoon and Village People) had/has strong homosexual overtones".

As Cllr Cranfield-Adams was the only Councillor to complain, and the only Councillor to have previously publicly declared himself homosexual, what disciplinary action does the Council now intend to take as his legal threat, issued as an official Council communication, to close down the borough's only independent community website, has brought the Council into disrepute and in this he is in clear breach of the Council's Members' Code of Conduct in precisely the same categories and sections as in Question 1? The legal threat he issued as a matter of Council business is an unprecedented blow to democracy in the borough, as the Council must surely acknowledge.”

Q3 “On 23 March, the Cabinet recommended the adoption of the Equality and Diversity Policy and Strategy and, in response to my representations to that Cabinet meeting, I was advised by the Chief Executive that Council disciplinary procedures for breaches and contraventions of said document were too voluminous to incorporate into it but were available elsewhere.

Could the Leader now advise me how the several breaches and contraventions of said document by Cllr Cranfield-Adams as itemised in the Questions 1 and 2 will be dealt with and refer me to the disciplinary procedures involved, the breaches and contraventions being of the following sections:

These are the specific breaches and contraventions:

Our Commitments:

We will promote...fair treatment for all our communities.
We will work with specific groups of people who are hard to reach...
We will particularly work with those groups who experience marginalisation, disadvantage and discrimination...
We will ensure that all Members...are clear about their roles and responsibilities under equalities legislation and Council policy...

Roles and Responsibilities for Implementation, Monitoring and Review:

Elected members will fulfil their statutory responsibilities under equalities legislation and aim to promote good community relations in all their work, particularly in their community leadership role.

Key Strategic Objectives:

To prevent unlawful discrimination and institutional discrimination.
To promote good relations between all sections of our diverse communities?”

To read the agenda of the Council meeting click here.