Council rejects live streaming of meetings after a stormy debate

A HEATED, lengthy and at times boisterous debate erupted among councillors at the October county council meeting over a proposal to live stream its meetings to the public.

Not for the first time since being elected to the council in 2019, cllr Aisling Moran proposed that the public should be allowed to view council meetings over the internet.

Unlike her previous motions where she called on Laois County Council to introduce live streaming of its meeting, this time she took a different approach when she proposed that “Laois County Council call on the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage Darragh O’Brien to make regulations in the public interest, to mandate all local authorities commence live streaming and arching of statutory council meetings and to provide appropriate funding from central government and to implement as soon as possible.” 

However, before she got out of the traps, council cathaoirleach cllr Pádraig Fleming pointed out that standing orders (rules of the meeting) do not allow a motion that was already discussed at a previous meeting to be re-entered on the agenda for a period of six months.

At the September meeting, cllr Moran (IND) had proposed the council implement live streaming of its meetings.

Before motions are discussed at council meetings, they go before a committee of the Corporate Policy Group (CPG). Cllr Moran claimed that the CPG is dominated by councillors from Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, “and they decide whether a motion goes on or not” to the agenda of a meeting.

She said: “As councillors, we have a democratic right to bring three motions a month to a meeting, if we so wish.” 

“You’re making accusations now,” said cathaoirleach Fleming.

Cllr Moran said: “The CPG does not decide whether a councillor can or can’t put a motion in the agenda. I’ve seen it before when I was on the CPG, where a councillor brings up a motion which is not to the likings of the majority of the CPG, that they tried to take it off the agenda. The CPG is not there to stop motions.” 

Cllr Moran said that the CPG comprises three members from the majority parties and one from the technical group (Sinn Féin, Labour and Independents).

She said: “The members of the CPG should not have a say whether or not a motion goes on. If they really wanted to, not that they do, they could stop every motion from the technical group.” 

“As a member of the CPG,” said cllr Paddy Bracken, “I reject cllr Moran’s assertion totally. There’s not one motion that didn’t go through by the CPG. The issue about cllr Moran’s motion was we had it last month. It might be asking the minister to order live streaming. But this council rejected live streaming, which we’re entitled to do. The CPG is not a majority rule. Every motion was left as was. I’m sick listening to lectures about how a motion appears all the time. It was clearly a repeat of the motion under a different format this time. I’m sick listening to this going on at every meeting.” 

Cathaoirleach Fleming said that cllr Moran’s latest motion sought to revoke or amend the motion that was defeated at the September meeting.

He said the standing orders state that a motion is not allowed on the agenda to revoke or amend any resolution of the council within six months of adoption, “except with the written consent of not less than six members of the council”.

He said that, given that cllr Moran’s new motion was seeking to revoke the council’s decision on her September motion, “the CPG agreed that the motion could not be forwarded to the (October) meeting”.

However, cathaoirleach Fleming went on to say that the meeting administrator had received the required six written notices to allow cllr Moran’s “slightly revised” motion to be included in the October agenda, for consideration by the full council.

“It’s a completely different motion,” said cllr Moran. 

She said that instead of calling on the council to live stream its public meetings, she was now calling on the minister to make regulations and mandate all local authorities to commence live streaming its meetings. In effect, if the minister did make such regulations and mandate every council, they would have no say and would have to follow the minister’s orders.

Cathaoirleach Fleming eventually put cllr Moran’s motion to the meeting.

She said: “There is no credible impediment to live streaming our council meetings, the technology is there, the money is there but, for some unknown reason, there’s no willingness to do so. This obstinate refusal to live stream our public meetings is an obstacle to public access and undermines the basic tenets of transparency, accountability and good governance.

“We are living in an age where so much of our lives, activities and services are carried out and experienced online. We can live stream funerals from rural churches, or Junior B football matches for those who cannot attend in person and yet, here in County Hall, the hub of our local democracy, we cannot live stream our monthly meetings.

“We pride ourselves on being a progressive local authority. We talk the talk about the digital economy and our state-of-the-art Digital Hub and yet we cannot give the public the option of tuning in to our proceedings.” 

She asked: “What are we afraid of? Why are we hiding away? Let's get our meetings and our work out there for everyone to see. Real accountability, genuine transparency and public engagement.

“The government is dishing out money like confetti at a 1970s wedding on all sorts of things, including bicycle sheds. We can certainly afford to make provision to live stream our meetings.

“It would be a positive, progressive and the right thing to do. Laois can lead the way in terms of access, accountability, transparency and partnership with the public who put us here to work and represent them and their interests, not our own.” 

Seconding the motion, cllr Marie Tuohy (LAB) said: “This isn’t a new concept. It’s 20-years ago since Fingal County Council introduced live streaming their meetings.

“Transparency and accountability are not dirty words. There’s no accusation implied or understood in these words. They’re positive and a target that we all aspire and stand for.

“Live streaming would be a resource and an archive that would be a valuable tool for everybody, not least of all for the public. It opens up access to the public to see how the chamber works. Not everybody can attend the public meetings in person.” 

She said: “Funeral are live streamed which is a most personal, private and emotional event. You can go on any webcam from any church around the country and view a funeral.” 

Cllr Paddy Bracken (FF) said: “The thing that bugs me every time I hear this mention about transparency, implying that there’s something wrong. Every second word is transparency or the lack of it. And you hear that we have to stand up and be counted.

“I’m over 37 years involved in local politics and I’ve never seen anything wrong or untoward done in my time. I’m not afraid to be put in front of any forum. I’m proposing that we reject this motion again today.” 

Cllr Bracken asked: “What protection has a public rep in the council chamber if they say something that is live streamed. We don’t have the same (absolute) privilege that they have in Leinster House. If something is live streamed and a councillor says something wrong and ends up in court, what protection have they?” 

Cllr Ollie Clooney (IND) said: “We’ve been here before, what a waste of time this is. It was ridiculous what went on last time. I’m a very busy person and have crops in the fields and having to listen to this again today.” 

He said: “We’re well served by the local media. The local newspapers are doing a fabulous job. Anything we say here can be read. It’s a small price to pay (for a newspaper). They have been very good to us even when we have stepped out of line, they haven’t published it. I have great pleasure in seconding Paddy Bracken’s proposal and put this to bed for good.” 

Cllr John King (FG) said: “I’m very satisfied with the local newspapers and the local radio. I’m happy continuing the way we are and fully oppose cllr Moran’s motion.” 

Cllr Tuohy said: “Cllr Bracken, nobody has suggested that there’s any wrongdoing. I reject that. People seem to be getting worked up and viewing transparency and accountability as some form of insult or implication. There’s not.

“In terms of protections, meetings are open to the public to attend and the press are here. Since I’ve been in the chamber, I haven’t seen anybody say anything that could possibly have any legal complications. I don’t think we have Dáil privilege but maybe we have some form of privilege.” 

She said: “I think we need to pay particular attention to the wording of cllr Moran’s motion. It’s to make regulations in the public’s interest. It’s asking the minister to intervene.” 

Before cllr Bracken’s motion was put to a vote, cllr Moran clarified that she was calling for the minister to provide an order to allow live streaming in every council chamber around the country.

Cllr Caroline Dwane Stanley (SF) asked: “Are we seriously going to take a vote trying to prevent a letter going to the minister? I’ve never before seen a vote being called asking for a letter not to go to a minister. It’s a first for me. If that is the case, there’s a message going out from this council that we’re going to prevent a letter from going to a minister, well then it‘s a sad day for local politics.” 

Those who voted in favour of cllr Bracken’s proposal to prevent live streaming council meetings in Laois were: Cllrs Fleming, Bracken, Seamus McDonald, John Joe Fennelly, Catherine Fitzgerald and Paschal McEvoy (all FF) as well as all five FG councillors Willie Aird, Conor Bergin, John King, Vivienne Phelan and Barry Walsh and Independent cllr Ollie Clooney. Cllr Bracken’s proposal was passed by 12 votes to seven.

Those in favour of live streaming the meetings were: Independent councillors Aisling Moran, Ben Brennan, James Kelly, Tommy Mulligan and Aidan Mullins as well as Sinn Féin cllr Caroline Dwane Stanley and Labour cllr Marie Tuohy.