Concerns have been raised that new standing orders brought in at Hadleigh Town council interfere with councillors' rights and duties to properly debate by removing their right to ask questions in a meeting.

Former councillor Angela Wiltshire is also worried that the standing orders also risk legal challenge because they contravene the legal guidance from the National Association of Local Councils and could breach international Human Rights law.

"The point of councils holding public meetings is so that the public can see their councillors deliberate and come to a decision," said Mrs Wiltshire. "Yes, councillors need to come prepared and should have read all the background information. But inevitably there will still be questions; questions for each other, questions about priorities, or questions that perhaps councillors believe would be better put in public.

"A council that had already answered all the questions in private would have a very sterile debate. The public would rightly think the debate was something of a sham.

"When I was councillor we were advised that we ought not to make decisions by email. How do we know how our elected representatives are doing if we cannot see them challenging and debating, making decisions and explaining themselves in a meeting which is open to the public. It was by watching the antics of the previous council that Hadleigh Together came about and promised not to do the same thing ie., do business in secret/private and prevent public scrutiny of what were, arguably, bad decisions."

It is understood no other council in the UK bars councillors from asking questions as part of the debate and Hadleigh Town Council (HTC} are the only local authority to adopt these form of standing orders, which are seen as contrary to local council guidelines.

Only one councillor, Andrew Knock, an Independent, spoke of his concerns and voted against the motion. Fellow Independent Gordon McLeod had not joined the meeting at that point, while Angela Gregg had resigned from the council earlier in the week.

Cllr Knock said asking questions was part of open debate and added: "I have several concerns about these. Our duty as councillors is to represent the public. It is right that the rules allow us to debate, consider and discuss then vote.

"We are not here just to vote, we are not here to do our business away from the public eye. It is the public right of scrutiny to see how we do our business."

No other councillor, all members of Hadleigh Together that stood on a platform of openness and transparency, debated the new standing orders and all voted for them to be adopted, despite the warning they could be acting illegally.

Local government legislation aims to make sure councils meet and debate as much as they can in public. The town council does not report to anyone, such as the district council. Public scrutiny is pretty much the only check there is on a council in between elections. This means councillors have to be able to debate things fully and publicly.

To help councils do this properly, the National Association of Local Councils (NALC) produces some model rules for meetings (Standing Orders) that all councils can adopt to ensure they are following best practice.

Mrs Wiltshire believes the new HTC rules do not follow the NALC model as the new Standing Orders remove the right of a councillor to ask a question during their contribution to the debate. Questions are only allowed at the discretion of the Chair.

This is contrary to NALC legal guidance for debates which says councillors can 'seek clarification' at meetings.

She said: "It is hard to see how councillors could seek clarification in a meeting if they do not have the right to ask questions. In fact, it is impossible to conceive of a meaningful debate that afford the right of councillors to ask questions as part of it.

"By giving so much discretion and control to the Chair, the restriction interferes with the public's right to see their elected representatives ask and answer questions as part of the public debate.

"The restriction is contrary to the Nolan principles of accountability and openness.

"The restriction is contrary to Article 10 of the European Commission of Human Rights, which includes the right to 'give and receive information'. It contravenes not only the councillors' human rights, but also, by proxy, those of their constituents.

HTC is the only council I know of that denies its councillors the right to ask questions as part of a normal debate. Every other council I've come across assumes councillors have the right to ask questions in a meeting."

A council can change its Standing Orders, but they have to be lawful. HTC may face legal challenges from councillors and the public over these issues. And once the parishioners understand the impact of these rules on the ability of their councillors to hold proper debates, it is likely to bring the council into disrepute.

Another rule change - about the code of conduct - also goes against the NALC guidance that says the rule is a legal requirement and should not be altered. That change may also face legal challenge and lead the council into disrepute.

Mrs Wiltshire added: "HTC's rules have other departures from the NALC model that I won't go into but they are by turns worrying or confusing. It's almost as if the Mayor was given free rein to write whatever rules he wanted without bothering to get them checked over by an expert.

"It is not clear why these changes were considered desirable or necessary – why not stick with the NALC model rules that are best practice? But whatever the rationale is, it was irresponsible of HTC to adopt these changes without having taken independent expert advice, as seems to be the case based on what was said in the meeting."

"I don't know why the Monitoring Officer did not comment on them at the meeting, but as it stands, the Monitoring Officer's silence risks being perceived by the public as an endorsement of these new rules."

There are currently six vacancies at Hadleigh Town Council following the resignation of nearly half the Hadleigh Together members last year, with five seats due to be filled at the May 6 local elections.

(Whatever Happened to Hadleigh Together? - full story here...)