Anger Over 'Gagging' of Victoria Hall Debate
Opposition says rare technical procedure used to stop motion
The chamber of Ealing Council
June 22, 2023
There has been an angry reaction to proceedings at an Ealing Council meeting this Tuesday (13 June) with complaints made that a motion on the future of Victoria Hall had been suppressed.
It had been hoped that an opposition motion might close the door on future plans to incorporate the historic building into property development similar to the one recently abandoned by the council.
The Liberal Democrats wanted a commitment that any new scheme involving Victoria Hall would be community-led and not involve its effective transfer to a third party.
The High Court is yet to rule on the challenge by the Friends of Victoria Hall to the way in which control was taken of the asset by Ealing Council.
Liberal Democrat Councillor Jon Ball, Opposition Spokesperson on Planning, Licensing and Housing raised the motion about Victoria Hall at the meeting but was prevented from continuing by a technical procedure. A "closure motion" under Standing Order 14.12 was put forward.
His colleague Gary Malcolm said its use by the Labour group was very rare and something that he had not seen in over 20 years in local government. He added he believed that its use in this context was not correct in this context but it was allowed to proceed anyway.
This meant that no vote was taken on whether the Council’s plan for an Ealing Town Hall hotel affecting Victoria Hall should be stopped.
The motion submitted read:
Council notes that almost £3m has been spent on the Ealing Town Hall hotel scheme to date excluding indemnity liability and considerable lost bookings revenue.
Council recommends that Cabinet cancels the Town Hall scheme.
Council believes:
1. That a future scheme for Ealing Town Hall should be community led rather than developer led.
2. That the council should create a genuinely independent Victoria Hall Trust, with the majority of members being non-councillors, which will determine the future use of the Victoria Hall.
3. That it is important to maintain the ability for community organisations and residents to make bookings at affordable costs in a range of rooms within both Victoria Hall Trust and Council-owned parts of the Town Hall.
Cllr Ball said, “Liberal Democrats say that Labour members of the cabinet are forever lecturing us about the dire state of the Council’s finances. The three million pounds that Labour has wasted on its doomed scheme to turn this Town Hall into a hotel, could have been spent on free school meals for all the borough’s school children across the summer holidays, to pay to plant twelve thousand trees in our streets. Or it could pay to rent a room for every single person sleeping rough on Ealing’s streets for a year. Liberal Democrats say that Ealing Labour should scrap the scheme and retain Victoria Hall as an available and affordable venue for local community groups and residents.”
Gill Rowley of the Friends of Victoria Hall said, “The Council has spurned an opportunity to explain its future intentions for returning the Victoria Hall for Ealing’s communities to enjoy once more. It was profoundly disappointing. By curtailing the debate in the way that it did, it felt as if the Council doesn’t have any plans for one of the Borough’s greatest assets, or that if it does it doesn’t have much faith in them.
“The fact that the Council chose instead to devote so much of the meeting to criticising national government was also a surprise. Whatever views Ealing residents have of our government, most expect Council meetings to concern themselves with addressing the many local issues that affect the Borough, not to get involved with national matters that best are debated in Parliament.”
A council spokesperson said.“Use of the procedure in question was justified on this occasion because there is an outstanding legal challenge that is critically relevant to the subject of the motion. In those circumstances, it would not be appropriate for the council to debate and vote on the motion”
Councillor Manro’s full statement from the meeting was as follows, “Mr Mayor, the Council first entered into a contract with Mastcraft in 2016 to carry out the project for Ealing Town Hall, and an agreement for lease was completed in 2019. Those arrangements still stand.
“I would like to take the opportunity to thank our partners Mastcraft for the work that they have done over the last 7 years, despite the delays that the project has experienced thus far.
“I would also like to say in response to this motion that the vast majority of the money that has been spent so far on the town hall project, as the Opposition well know from the answer to the written question they submitted back in April, has been on the relocation of services like the CCTV control room and electoral services. Those relocations serve a wider business need for the council, and they have benefited and will continue to benefit the council regardless of the town hall project.
“As the Opposition also know, there is a legal challenge which has yet to conclude regarding this project.
“Mr Mayor, I would like to reassure the Opposition and residents that Ealing Town Hall will remain an important part of civic life in our borough, regardless of the outcome of the outstanding legal challenge. Both in the new and improved Civic Wing, but also the continued guarantee of community use of key parts of the town hall, including the Victoria Hall.
“However, because of the outstanding legal challenge, it would not be appropriate for any member of the cabinet, members of the planning committee, or members of the Victoria Hall Trust Committee that are currently present to speak on this motion, or for the Council to vote on it.
“Mr Mayor, in accordance with Rule 14.12 of the Council and Committee Procedure Rules, I’d like to move a closure motion that we proceed to the next business. “
The Council Meeting can be viewed online when it is posted on the Ealing Council YouTube channel.
Like Reading Articles Like This? Help Us Produce More This site remains committed to providing local community news and public interest journalism. Articles such as the one above are integral to what we do. We aim to feature as much as possible on local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, community-based initiatives and even helping people find missing pets. We’ve always done that and won’t be changing, in fact we’d like to do more. However, the readership that these stories generates is often below that needed to cover the cost of producing them. Our financial resources are limited and the local media environment is intensely competitive so there is a constraint on what we can do. We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and the expansion of our coverage in this area. A suggested monthly payment is £8 but we would be grateful for any amount for instance if you think this site offers the equivalent value of a subscription to a daily printed newspaper you may wish to consider £20 per month. If neither of these amounts is suitable for you then contact info@neighbournet.com and we can set up an alternative. All payments are made through a secure web site. One-off donations are also appreciated. Choose The Amount You Wish To Contribute. If you do support us in this way we’d be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor. For businesses we offer the chance to be a corporate sponsor of community content on the site. For £30 plus VAT per month you will be the designated sponsor of at least one article a month with your logo appearing if supplied. If there is a specific community group or initiative you’d like to support we can make sure your sponsorship is featured on related content for a one off payment of £50 plus VAT. All payments are made through a secure web site. |