Labour leader condemns council’s motion calling for boycott of MPs
A motion to the Borough Council calling for no further invitations to Council events to be issued to local MPs Ann and Alan Keen was carried this week. Strengthened by a Liberal Democrat amendment stressing the desirability of a good working relationship between the MPs and Borough Council, the motion received cross-party support from all sides of the chamber except Labour.
Labour councillors condemned the motion claiming that it was an attempt to "silence" the Keens. However, Deputy Leader Councillor Ruth Cadbury protested that the Keens had merely "reserved their right" not to co-operate but had not carried out their threat, a position Councillor Phil Andrews dismissed as "ludicrous".
After having supported the election of Councillor Phil Andrews to Hounslow's ruling Executive at Borough Council on 23rd May 2006, the Labour Group later called for his resignation on the grounds of his alleged "unsuitability" as he had by his own admission been an active member of the National Front some twenty years before, a fact which they had been aware of when electing him to the Executive in May. Councillor Andrews left the National Front in 1989 and has frequently and vociferously renounced his former politics.
Speaking after the meeting, Councillor Andrews (who moved the original motion) said, "The motion simply calls for clarity and consistency from the Keens and from the Labour Group, a position which they clearly have difficulty with as their threat of non co-operation was deliberately worded in such a way as to enable them to move the goalposts at will.
"As it stood the Keens could refuse to give the local authority their help and assistance supposedly on a point of principle, but still expect to scurry along for publicity and photo opportunities generated by the Council. This position was inconsistent, dishonest and morally untenable.”
Labour leader Jagdish Sharma disagreed stating “Cllr. Andrews is being petty and vindictive in preventing Council officers from having contact with the MPs. It is such a short-sighted and, frankly, small-minded thing to do" said. "The MPs have never said that they are withholding co-operation and for Councillor Andrews to claim this is a falsehood"
"In the last year, our two MPs have dealt with well over 4400 items of casework, helping the residents of our borough with their problems. It's sad that Councillor Andrews has nothing better to do with his time than think of ideas like this that will prevent MPs from contacting their constituents."
Cllr Andrews countered, “I would point out that we have not shut off contact. Mr and Mrs Keen did that by reserving the right to withdraw their co-operation from the new administration in their letter to the Council Leader dated 27th July 2006. The Leader of the Council confirmed at yesterday's Borough Council meeting that this threat would appear to have been carried out, with several letters from himself to Ann Keen sent after this date remaining unanswered. The motion simply gave some consistency to the relationship with both parties. The motion leaves the door open for the MPs to reopen normal channels of communication by discontinuing their policy of non co-operation. It is our sincere hope that they will choose to do so.”
Leader of Hounslow Council, Peter Thompson, who spoke in favour of Cllr Andrew’s motion said, "There is nothing in the motion that stops the MP’s for Hounslow from bring residents concerns to the Council. But we are not just here to provide photo opportunities for their political gain. I am hard pressed to think of any issue, in the last twelve months, on which they have work with the Council. If the MP’s for Hounslow wanted to work constructively with this new administration we would have welcomed their input.”
One thing is clear, this row looks set to continue.
April 27, 2007