Dear Mr Stewart,


I am writing to complain about the conduct of Cllr John Powley on the morning of Tuesday the 13th of December in the moments before the full Council meeting which took place that day.


Along with a number of citizens of Cambridgeshire, I was attending the meeting at Shire Hall in support of the Cambridge Campaign Against the Arms Trade who were addressing the council in accordance with the agreed protocol at Public Question Time. While standing outside the main entrance to the building, in what BBC Look East described as a small, quiet protest, the assembled crowd was treated to the spectacle of Cllr Powley appearing at the balcony above to declare that we were "pathetic" and should "grow up". He then shouted again that we were "pathetic".


As I am sure you are aware, the constitution of Cambridgeshire County Council includes a Members Code of Conduct which, in keeping with the The National Code of Local Government Conduct, details the standards to which the general public can expect elected councillors to adhere. Section 2(b) of that code stipulates that Councillors must "treat others with respect", while Section 4 states that "A member must not in his official capacity, or any other circumstance, conduct himself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing his office or authority into disrepute". By berating members of the public who had taken the time to attempt to take part in the democratic process, before having even heard what they had to say, must be, to say the least, regarded as treating those individuals with a lack of respect. Such behaviour must also surely bring his office and authority into disrepute.


In your "Listening and Involving Strategy" document the County Council proudly claims that "the Council is committed to seeking the views of local people". As an ex-employee of the County, I have no doubt that this is true in the case of many officers and councillors. But such words are more than a little hollow when members of the public are treated with such obvious contempt as was the case in the incident outlined above. Cllr Powley is on the Pension Fund Investment Committee which deals with the matter about which myself and others wished to raise concerns. Rather than deal with us as intelligent citizens and take on board what we had come to say, he choose to address us in a manner which would be more appropriate in a school playground than in a decision-making institution which plays such an important role in the County.


I appreciate that Cllr Powley may not have been speaking for the County Council as a whole during his unprovoked outburst. I feel strongly, however, that if the public are to feel confident that their views and input are genuinely valued by those running local government, this kind of behaviour must be strongly condemned.


Thank you for you time and I look forward to your response.



Yours sincerely

Richard Rippin

Cambridge Against the Arms Trade



Back to front page