TIME-WASTING tactics could be used to stamp out debate on Burnley's shamed ex-mayor, Coun Peter Swainston, tonight.
Labour bosses are understood to have issued a "Stop Harry" order to prevent a motion by Independent Harry Brooks, condemning "acts of gross indecency" by people in elected office, from being heard.
That could mean engineering tonight's full council meeting to run on and out of time before the debate - the last item on the agenda - is reached.
"There is going to be some filibustering," said one Labour insider, referring to the tactic often used in Parliament.
Another added: "There won't be any 'gross indecency' debate tonight."
Alarm bells have sounded for Labour leaders since Coun Brooks put down his motion after Coun Swainston's court conviction and subsequent resignation as mayor.
By voting for the motion, they would be condemning Coun Swainston, placing greater pressure on him to also quit as a Labour councillor. By failing to do so they would be seen to be condoning illegal acts by public figures in public toilets.
But the greatest concern, according to party insiders, is the potential damage Coun Brooks' sspeech could inflict at election time.
Even if the debate goes out of time tonight, it will return at a subsequent council meeting - but that will be safely after the General Election.
It is understood party members believe the flak they will take by ducking the issue tonight is preferable to what might result if the firebrand councillor is allowed to speak on the issue.
Unusually for full council meetings, two special speakers have been invited to address the assembly - which will, of course, extend the meeting by up to an hour.
But even without a filibuster, there are other procedural methods the majority group could employ to rule out Coun Brooks' debate tonight.
The Liberal Democrat opposition has yet to declare its stance on the issue.
Coun Brooks has already received a letter from chief executive Roger Ellis, spelling out the law of defamation and, surprisingly, limitations imposed by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, which Coun Brooks says could not possibly apply in Coun Swainston's case.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article