Walthamstow West Community Council

Censorship?

The Waltham Forest Guardian picked up on suggestions that a form of censorship has been operating in connection with our Community Council. My own thoughts on this are below. Note that this is just as unofficial a view as every other part of this website!

I was a bit nonplussed when the suggestion of "Censorship" came up at our Community Council. Sure, I've occasionally felt the need to press a department to come up with a "sufficient" response to a resident's enquiry - busy officers are sometimes slow, or over-cautious in responding - but the CC support team actively help me with this, rather than hindering. We know our Council is not above the odd bungle, but I've found overwhelmingly that the officers and councillors I meet are committed to identifying and solving problems and that the best outcomes occur when residents, officers and councillors work together to drive improvements. Of course there will always be disputes, and both campaigners and hard-pressed departments will want to make their case as compellingly as they can. Call that "spin" if you must, but I've seen no trace of censorship here.

This Community Chair is not above the odd bungle either - I can look back on a few eye-watering mistakes from the chair. One of these is my (unintentional) fudging of the role of "minutes". The CC teams have publicly resolved to move away from formal minutes, possibly towards a more readable "meeting report". Probing consultation has revealed that the formality of proceedings is a real barrier to many "ordinary" residents who might otherwise like to join in. Yet we don't want the CCs to become an impotent talking shop either. The primary purpose of CCs must be as the "front desk" of public debate, where "ordinary" residents can play a part without being intimidated by jargon and procedural wrangling. And yet complex and controversial issues must also have some public arena where campaigners can seek answers and examine them in detail. Personally, I don't believe CCs can completely fulfil both functions, and we certainly haven't got the balance right yet. Work continues - expect a few more mistakes!