On Monday 26 October, together with other local residents, I attended The Liverpool East District Committee meeting.

 At the start of the meeting, the new Chair, Councillor Stuart Monkcom, announced that he was going to allow a public question time and this would be the last item on the agenda, but the questions would be restricted to only items on the agenda that night.

 This is a huge departure from the previous format of these meetings, which for at least ten years (similar meetings were known as Area Committee meetings), the Public Question Time was at the start of the meeting and questions could be asked on any subject, and if they were unable to be answered at the time, then an answer was forwarded to the questioner within 14 days.

 Councillor Steve Radford protested at this new rule that the public could ask questions only on the night’s agenda, and a number of councillors of all three parties supported him.

 The councillors requested a vote on returning to the old system i.e. the public being allowed to ask questions on any subject. The chairman denied them this vote and reiterated the fact that only questions on that night’s agenda could be asked.

I found it particularly ironic when a glossy council handbook on the table contained a foreword, which stated “Over the next 12 months, as chair of the District Committee, I will make sure that we continue to listen to the community and work together to develop lasting improvements across Liverpool East.” This foreword was signed by the same chairman who had denied the public the right to ask questions.

 Considering that the City Council claims to be open, transparent and democratic, I feel that that it is no wonder why there is such public disinterest in local politics

Incidentally my question was to have been to ask "whether the Council could do anything to prevent the surprise closure of the Active Age Centre in a few weeks time", a matter which I felt to be of an urgent nature in the circumstances.

 Hugh Pearson

An Anfield Resident