When is Legal Action Threatened by a Parish Council Legal - And at What Cost to Residents?

 

Recently, Betley Parish Council passed a resolution at an extraordinary meeting.  The resolution passed, seemingly unanimously since no counter resolutions were recorded, might surprise those residents who take the issue of freedom of speech seriously and responsibly.  The resolution? To consider pursuing legal action for libel — against this blog.

According to the official Minutes:

“Members considered that the ongoing inaccurate statements being published in the blog, were of a libellous nature, and intended to discredit not only the Parish Council, but also individuals. RESOLVED: (a) That the Clerk makes provisional enquiries into the possibility of taking legal action for libel, against the author of the blog, together with the costs involved.”

Surprisingly, no one from the Parish Council contacted the author of the Blog before this public allegation was made.  No evidence was cited, no opportunity was offered to clarify or correct anything either.  The claim was simply stated in the Minutes, passed as a resolution, and entered into the public record.

The ‘offending’ Blog statement cited by the Parish Council was:

“Fast forward to this year's accounts where £8000 has been earmarked to cover the cost of an election should one actually take place. The Parish Council has already advertised the vacancy for a seat on the Parish Council which will be in the form of yet another co-option. It would appear that other councils charge between £200–£800 to cover such an event. So perhaps it needs to be explained why Betley is envisaging £8000.”

Hopefully to many this would be a legitimate question, which has been based on published financial information and invites public explanation.  All that is expressed here is a concern over public spending and how the precept is being used.

The question that thus needs to be asked is:  Can a Parish Council sue (a blog or resident) for Libel?

A legal precedent — notably Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd (1993) — makes it clear that public bodies cannot sue for defamation, as it would restrict free speech and inhibit democratic accountability. Councillors are expected to face public scrutiny — not suppress it. So unless there is a later precedent set, then the answer might be – probably not!

We are further led to believe that even if an individual councillor feels defamed, they must take personal legal action — at their own cost, not funded by the parish precept ie your (extra) council tax.

To use public money to explore suing a resident for raising concerns could, in my view, be seen as:

• A misuse of public funds (see Local Government Act 1972);
• A breach of financial regulations;
• And potentially, an attempt to intimidate, even to harass and threaten.

Several formal questions have been submitted to the Parish Council and the Monitoring Officer querying :

• The legal advice obtained before this resolution was made?
• If any public money has already been spent on this issue?
• What in this statement, precisely, is believed to constitute a libel?  (This would not be the first time that an allegation of Libel has been used.)

The precept is raised from all residents in the parish to fund pubic services – not what appears to be a legal threat, with the seeming aim of inhibiting or silencing this Blog and the view of the author and others.

As if this weren’t enough, the Council has also recently adopted a new Social Media Policy, which includes a clause proposing that the Council may seek to close private blogs and social media channels that it might object to.

When I served as a Councillor, I raised an objection to this clause — stating that it posed a risk to free expression, and could be used to target legitimate public commentary.

I was told that “no one understood the amendments” I had made to this or any of the other policies adopted.  The clause was adopted anyway.

This would not be my understanding of how a democracy works!

Policies that could affect people’s right to speak, write, or publish must be carefully considered, debated, and justified — not waved through in a somewhat, and apparent, vague manner.

During the years I was a parish Councillor and even in recent months, I have also faced:

• Delays and silence around Freedom of Information and Subject Access Requests (mainly the NBC) and information that was not entirely accurate or full and being prevented from acquiring/accessing the information requested (Betley PC);
• A lack of transparency around financial decisions;
• And now, a public resolution to pursue legal action without any evidence, explanation, or contact.

Taken together, this appears to resemble a conscious strategy of wearing people down — through bureaucracy, legal ambiguity, and public statements that deter others from speaking out.

This blog exists to ask questions and invite transparency — not to attack or defame.  If anything published on this Blog is inaccurate, it has always been  corrected.   However, as its author,  I will not be silenced by vague accusations or seemingly sinister policies., which limit the right to be heard.

This is not an individual crusade.  If free speech is to be preserved, then these issues are something we all need to be involved with and to take an active interest in.

 So what can you do?

• Ask the Council how much if any public money it is spending on this  ‘fact finding’/ legal action.
• Attend meetings, ask questions, and request accountability, in a respectful manner.
• Read the Social Media Policy (and all its other policies) in order to decide whether these protect or restrict public expression and the public interests.
• You could also share this blog with others who care about open, local democracy.

Be assured that this blog will continue to publish facts, raise concerns, and ask questions — because that is how accountability, transparency and fairness are should work.