Man refused chance to speak at Oxford City Council twice

Members of the public are permitted to ask questions and address Oxford City Council meetings within certain limits.

Among these are that the subject must be something that directly affects people in the city or about a matter for decision at the meeting.

Chaka Artwell had two public addresses he wanted to make at the full council meetings in October 2024 rejected by the Monitoring Officer despite submitting them for perusal by the deadline.

READ MORE: Man stabbed car window seven times in road-rage incident

Mr Artwell's speech entitled 'Lewisham' stated that Lewisham council's refusing to fly Stonewall’s flag was unjust.

The second speech called for a ban on the city council's operatives ODS spraying the widely used herbicide glyphosate and disposing of it down the drains of Oxford.

Independent councillor for Rose Hill and Iffley David Henwood (Image: Oxford Mail) Some scientists have linked it to health problems related to its accumulation in the environment although this is disputed.

Independent councillor David Henwood, who represents his ward of Rose Hill and Iffley, said: "Mr Artwell was defending the rights of Stonewall’s LGBTQIAP+ creed community" and his second speech highlighted that the use of glyphosphate was "inconsistent" from "Oxford’s 'climate' motivated councillors".

"To be clear I think Artwell's democratic right to hold politicians to account has been interfered with, and the opposite tack should be applied where we encourage members of the public to share a view or hold politicians to account."

He said the monitoring officer could 'as a minimum highlight the unacceptable phrases', so revision can be made, rather than simply using her authority to frustrate England's long tradition for the public to address council meetings?

"This monitoring officer’s role ought to be to encourage the Oxford’s public participation in holding the elected councillors, and executive officers to public account."

When Mr Artwell questioned the refusals, leader of Oxford City Council Susan Brown sent an email to him and all councillors saying "it really would be political interference if elected councillors sought to overturn the rulings of the Monitoring Officer, and unacceptable to boot".

READ MORE: Spider season: Tarantulas confirmed to be in UK

Oxford City Council laid out its constitution which states that the Head of Law and Governance can reject a public address or question or a question on notice by a councillor, and the Lord Mayor can reject an address or question without notice.

The reasons are: if it is not about something the council is responsible for or about something that directly affects people in the city or about a matter for decision at the meeting; it is defamatory, frivolous, trivial or offensive; it requires the council to make public exempt or confidential information; it relates to individual personal circumstances; and if a near identical question or address has been submitted in the last six months, whether or not by the same individual.

If an address or question is rejected by the Head of Law and Governance or the Lord Mayor reasons must be given, the council said.