'Toxic' or 'exemplary'? Peterborough councillors discuss their standard of debate

Debate between councillors at Peterborough City Council (PCC): is it exemplary – or toxic?

Both words were used as councillors of all parties discussed the standard of behaviour shown by themselves and their colleagues in public council meetings, with opinions differing significantly.

The debate arose during a question-and-answer session with Eleanor Kelly, a local government expert and chair of PCC’s independent improvement panel, which has overseen the council’s governance and finances over the past two years.

The panel was established after PCC requested exceptional financial support from the government to ensure that it remains functional and viable.

Liberal Democrats leader, Cllr Christian Hogg (Lib Dems, Fletton and Stanground) began the debate by asking Ms Kelly for her opinion of the standard of behaviour at PCC, adding that he believed there had been a “slight slipping of the mask” in her presence.

“There is an element of toxicity creeping into the chamber,” he added, “and hopefully we can keep that to the absolute minimum”.

Earlier during the debate, Cllr Shabina Qayyum (Labour, East) received a round of applause after asking her fellow councillors to abide by PCC’s values, which include integrity and respect, because of a “poor show” from former leader Cllr Wayne Fitzgerald (Conservatives, West).

He had called new council leader Cllr Mohammed Farooq (Peterborough First, Hargate and Hempstead), who took over from him after a fraught no confidence vote, “deluded” for believing he’s brought greater transparency and stability to the council.

Conservatives say 'collaboration from us has ended'

“We will do what we need to do in the interest of the residents in the city,” Cllr Fitzgerald continued. “We will be fair, we’ll debate and we’ll hold the council to account, but I can tell you now that the collaboration from us ended the day they did what they did, aided and abetted by opposition.

“They got rid of the Conservatives and you’ve got pound-shop Conservatives now.”

Cllr Nick Sandford (Lib Dems, Paston and Walton), chairing the meeting, intervened after these comments to ask Cllr Fitzgerald to assume “a more respectful tone”.

But while Labour and Liberal Democrat councillors implied that Cllr Fitzgerald was lowering the tone of debate – his contention and that of his fellow Conservatives was not only that he had not, but in fact that he is responsible for it having become more collegiate.

“It pleases me to hear you talk about the last two years of improvement,” he said to Ms Kelly, “and I am going to take full credit for that – with my colleagues and the people in opposition – in terms of the collaborative nature I managed to foster during those two years.”

Cllr Andy Coles (Conservatives, Fletton and Woodston) added that it’s “disingenuous” to say that debate is now toxic when the “cultural change was led by Cllr Fitzgerald” after problems over the standard of debate were identified under previous leaders.

Councillors deserve a 'gold star' for their behaviour

Ms Kelly agreed that it’s “undoubtedly the case that Cllr Fitzgerald brought a new collegiate approach to the improvement process” and added that the whole council in fact deserves a “gold star” for behaviour.

“Your behaviour is actually exemplary in comparison to many other councils,” she said to all councillors. “I have seen some doozies and you’re just no way near some of the level of behaviour that some people have reached.”

But Labour leader Cllr Dennis Jones (Labour, Dogsthorpe) said that increased unity under Cllr Fitzgerald was inevitable after the “storm clouds gathered” over PCC and “Cllr Fitzgerald or whoever was in his position wouldn’t have had much choice” but to change previous standards.

Over the past two or three months, “toxicity” has returned and “hasn’t come from this side of the chamber”, he added.

The improvement panel chaired by Ms Kelly will continue to oversee PCC next year.

It will monitor the standard of behaviour in the council and particularly whether councillors are able to make necessary decisions together, she said, which is one of the several factors that will determine whether the panel can be dissolved.

The panel was initially expected to dissolve after two years but councillors voted at the same meeting to keep it in place while they navigate the next few months of budget setting and preparing for next year’s elections.