Fri, 23
11 °C
Sat, 24
8 °C
Sun, 25
11 °C

Councillors hit back at Advertiser report on meeting attendance

Councillors were quick to respond with criticism to a feature on their attendance published in last week’s Advertiser.

The article found 19 out of 56 councillors missed a quarter or more of their council meetings from April 2016-April 2017.

The information was taken directly from the Royal Borough website, including the percentage figures.

Cllr David Coppinger (Con, Bray) said the Advertiser expected councillors to work 365 days a year, and did not take holidays into account in the report.

Cllr MJ Saunders (Con, Cookham and Bisham) tweeted: “I was a bit shocked to run a diary query for the last year and found I’d been at 201 meetings and spent over 1,000 hours on council business.”

Cllr Colin Rayner (Con, Horton and Wraysbury) tweeted: “I will cancel my hospital operation and my stay in hospital and leave my sick bed next to make sure I keep my attendance!”

In a sustained attack on the paper, Cllr Geoff Hill (Con, Oldfield) accused it of running the story without ‘thought or consultation’, adding reporters should ‘do your job right’.

Leader of the opposition Cllr Lynne Jones (Ind, Old Windsor) was positive. She said: “Good journalism but some councillors do more behind the scenes than others as well. You can usually tell by their input at meetings.”

She added: “I appreciate good journalism and transparency. If the council publishes the data then they can be challenged on it. Democracy.”

Cllrs Coppinger, Hill and Jones all had attendance of above 75 per cent.

One councillor sent the Advertiser a new photo of themselves to be used with future articles.

The article received a lot of positive feedback from residents who praised the piece.

On Twitter, Michael Wadley said: “Your feature has hit a nerve. The reaction from some councillors has been astonishing and illuminating.”

Richard Endacott tweeted: “No one expects 100 per cent, however some councillors attendance is less than 60 per cent. I hear some of those excuses from my sixth formers.”

Brian Millin said: “Really wonder why councillors feel the need to snipe at the ’Tiser for printing data from RBWM website. Good article worth printing in my view.”

Cllr Leo Walters (Con, Bray), who had not responded in time for last week’s article, said his 69 per cent attendance was due to family health issues.

The Advertiser is still to hear from Cllr Nicola Pryer (67 per cent), Cllr Hashim Bhatti (62 per cent), Cllr David Evans (72 per cent) and Cllr Judith Diment (60 per cent).


Leave your comment

Share your opinions on

Characters left: 1500


  • Pursuer

    17:05, 13 April 2017

    Dear oh dear, many raw nerves it seems. I note Cllr Hill's comment re transparency-now where have I heard complaints about lack of transparency- uhm are yes I remember- perhaps Cllr's will remember as well ? As it now appears some Cllr's want us to know what they do. If there was more tranparency then we wouldn't have to wonder about what they do- it would be clera!! Inevitably some Cllr's do work at home & out of hours, but their allowances are there to cover such inconvenience. Remember when election times come around how prospective councillors knock on doors and waffle on about wanting to serve the community- Well work at home comes into that category does it not?There are some Cllr's who invite e-mail contact, but never acknowledge anything and frequently there is no output resulting from the highlighted issues. So well done Advertiser- its about time someone did a bit of, to use a US expression, 'kicked a***, is it not?



Most Recent

Most read

Top Ten Articles