​Ards and North Down councillors demanded secrecy over flags policy 'call-in'

The revelation comes as an expert of Freedom of Information requests told the BBC's ‘Nolan Show’ that he can't see “any circumstances whereby the council’s decision can stand”.

Last week, the News Letter revealed that a request for transparency on a 'call-in motion' about the flying of the Union Flag at war memorials had been rejected by Ards and North Down Council – after a Freedom of Information request by the loyalist campaigner Jamie Bryson.

When asked about the reasons for the secrecy, the council told this newspaper that councillors had “individual data rights protected by legislation, and this is not waived by their position as elected members of a local government body”.

However, it did not disclose that the anonymous councillors had themselves requested that their involvement in the process be kept from the public.

That new information emerged in a response to the BBC's ‘Nolan Show’, broadcast on Monday.

The programme had asked about the legal basis for the council's view that elected members need to give their consent for their request to be made public.

A council spokesperson revealed that “the members who submitted the ‘call-in’ notice did not consent to its release when consulted as part of the FOI process.

“Concerning the identity of those elected members who signed the call-in notice, they retain individual data rights protected by legislation, and this is not waived by their position as elected members of a local government body".

That does not, however, prevent the council from making the information public.

The council's own policy on transparency states “we will always be open, honest, transparent, trustworthy and accountable in our business relationships”.

It claims this is one of its “core values” that underpins “all that we say and do”.

The News Letter asked the council if it would release this information in light of this pledge, but it was unable to “within the given time frame”.

Last week, the News Letter repeatedly asked the Alliance Party and SDLP if they they agreed with the council’s position, if they believe it is democratic, and whether their councillors will give the council their permission to make this information – which is undoubtedly in the public interest in a democracy – public.

Neither party responded.

Martin Rosenbaum, an expert on Freedom of Information legislation who was formerly a BBC journalist, told the ‘Nolan Show’ that “I can’t see any circumstances whereby the council’s decision can stand.

“I can’t see any circumstances whereby the ICO will uphold the council’s decision”.

He added: “This goes to the heart of democratic decision making and whether or not when decisions are taken by local councils or other public authorities, that the reasons why those decisions are taken out in the open, so that they can be scrutinised and people can take part in discussions themselves in a well-informed way.”

Mr Rosenbaum said it was also important so that the public can make up their mind about how they vote in the future – and whether they are satisfied about the actions of the councillors that they have already elected.

He said that the council's decision not to release the call-in form that had been requested by Mr Bryson is not likely to withstand scrutiny and investigation from the Information Commissioner's Office.

When asked by the News Letter how the call-in process works in the council, a spokesperson said: “A requisition for a call-in must be submitted in writing via a standard form to the chief executive by 5pm on the fifth working day following the issuing of the council or committee decision log that records the decision to which the call-in relates.

“If the requisition is received after this date, it would be deemed inadmissible.”

The council provided an example form, which shows that councillors must tick a box to show whether they object to a policy on procedural grounds or on the grounds of community impact.

They must also provide their name and signature.