Islington News: St Thomas's Church

Publications by New Journal Enterprises

Home

Archive

Competition

Islington Tribune - by ROISIN GADELRAB
Published: 22 August 2008

Vicar leads attack on Town Hall ‘secrecy’

A VICAR has waded into a censorship row, criticising a new Town Hall policy of blanking out the names of objectors to licensing applications.
The Reverend Stephen Coles, of St Thomas’s Church in Finsbury Park, has attacked Islington Council’s decision to withhold the names of those making written objections filed at the Town Hall.
He has been joined by politicians in his condemnation of a change in policy which has brought warnings that the democratic process is under threat.
In the past, letters objecting to licence change applications have been available for all to see, unless objectors asked for their names to be withheld. Now the signatures on the letters will only be made available to the applicants involved, usually pub landlords.
The council says identities are being protected because of the “distress” residents have suffered in the past.
Mr Coles’ name was obscured, without his approval, on an objection he made in January to an Emirates Stadium concert. He said that it was too easy for people to make rather snide objections if their names were kept secret. “What’s wrong with a robust discussion about something?” he added.
“Before they change the rules they should make their reasons clear. As there’s provision for people to ask for their names to be withheld, it should be that way round and not the other.”
The Town Hall claimed the change was a matter of data protection. However, a spokeswoman for the Information Commissioner’s Office told the Tribune yesterday (Thursday) that publishing the details was “not a breach of the Data Protection Act”.
She added: “Local authorities can publish the details of those making submissions to licensing applications and there’s nothing in the Data Protection Act to stop that.”
Labour councillor Paul Convery said: “I have a nervous shudder every time I hear a bureaucrat uttering the words ‘data protection’ because I know it’s camouflage for a matter of convenience. It’s a standard alibi reached for when they don’t want to do something.”
He added: “If there’s ever a case that there’s a risk of intimidation it would be from the wrath of the landlords. So we’ve got this absurd situation where landlords can see the names but the public can’t.”
Green councillor Katie Dawson said the new policy was “over-the-top”, “controlling” and “unnecessarily secretive”. She added: “In the interests of democracy, empowering people and transparency, there’s a very good reason why this hasn’t happened before. It’s disempowering to take that away.
“It’s what frustrates people about local authorities. They take this ‘we know better’ approach and it doesn’t fit in with their listening agenda. There needs to be a lot more openness as long as people have the option to ask for their details to be withheld.”
A Town Hall spokesman said: “We’ve had complaints in the past from residents who have been unhappy that personal details were made public without their knowledge when they object to licensing applications.
“In some cases this has caused great distress.”
He added: “After legal advice and careful consideration, Islington Council has decided not to publish licensing objectors’ details in future, to protect people’s privacy.
“Objectors’ details will still be made available to applicants, in line with licensing law.”

Comment on this article.
(You must supply your full name and email address for your comment to be published)

Name:

Email:

Comment:

Your comments: