TWO Independent councillors have called for what they describe as a “unique Parish Meeting” to discuss the current governance and leadership of Culcheth and Glazebury Parish Council.
Calling it an “unprecedented move” Cllrs Neil Johnson and Bernie Kingston say it will provide an opportunity for the community to make a stand, after claiming they have been blocked from even speaking at meetings.
A Parish Meeting differs from the traditional monthly meetings of the Parish Council. These special meetings can be convened by six electors, or two serving Parish Councillors under Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 1972.
A Parish Meeting is a statutory meeting of the local government electors of Culcheth and Glazebury. All electors are entitled to attend, speak and vote.
Newchurch Parish Hall has been selected as the venue to ensure adequate capacity and accessibility for residents. The meeting will take place on Friday, 24th April, from 7 pm until 9 pm. The Parish Council Chair Cllr. Paul Campbell will preside at the meeting.
The outcome of any vote will be recorded and published. While a Parish Meeting cannot dissolve or dismiss a Parish Council, votes can be taken on any question arising at the meeting as a formal expression of the electors’ views and may be submitted to the principal authority. The opportunity also exists to request a Parish poll on any question arising from the meeting, which will mean that electors have the chance to vote formally at polling stations.
Cllr Neil Johnson says: “Enough is enough. For months, we have had to endure a Parish Council shrouded in secrecy, whose members treat the public and local residents with utter contempt. “Together, Labour and the Conservatives have formed an “Anti-Democracy Coalition”.
“Operating a closed shop, they refuse to engage with questions, decline to give certain information about the financial transactions of the Parish Council, and even hire private security to police their meetings.
“They do their best to block Independent councillors from even speaking and frustrate attempts by the public to get involved.
“On 24th April, we will have the opportunity to come together as a community and make a stand. We expect higher standards of our representatives than those which have been demonstrated recently.
“A Parish Meeting is a statutory meeting of the local government electors of Culcheth and Glazebury. It is not a meeting of the Parish Council. All electors are entitled to attend, speak and vote.
“This is a highly unusual move, and there has never been a Parish Meeting held in Culcheth and Glazebury before.
“The sole purpose of this meeting will be to discuss the governance and management of the Parish Council by those currently in charge.
“I encourage anyone who has an interest in these matters to turn up. Bring your friends, your neighbours, your family members. Let us ensure our voices are heard loud and clear.
“The Parish Council has published inaccurate information online about this meeting and its potential consequences. I urge residents not to be swayed by this disinformation campaign.
“We have the right to call for a public vote if we wish on any matter arising in the Parish Meeting.
“It’s time to deliver our verdict. On 24th April, the people will speak. And this time, they will be heard.”
A spokesperson for Culcheth & Glazebury Parish Council responded: “The claim that this is an “unprecedented,” or “unique” event, and that “there has never been a Parish Meeting held in Culcheth and Glazebury before,” is incorrect.
“A Parish Meeting is not a new or exceptional occurrence; it is a standard and longstanding part of local governance. Culcheth and Glazebury has long held Parish Meetings on an annual basis, which is the legal required minimum. In areas such as Warrington, where each Parish also has a Parish Council, the annual Parish Meeting is usually held on the same date as the Annual Parish Council Meeting. As Cllr Johnson has been a Parish Councillor for five years, he should be well aware of this.
“We are concerned by the suggestion that the Council is engaged in any form of “anti-democratic” activity.
“Such language risks misleading residents and undermining confidence in local democratic institutions without justification.
“Residents are, of course, entitled to attend any properly convened Parish Meeting and to express their views. However, it is important that such engagement is based on accurate information and conducted in a respectful and constructive manner.
“The Parish Council chairman will be chairing the meeting and will be setting the standing orders for how the meeting is run, as per the Local Government Act 1972. In accordance with the rules, the meeting will be advertised to the public with at least seven days notice.
“We would advise residents to view the information documents on our website for facts regarding Parish Meetings and Parish Polls.
“Both are funded by the Parish Council and ultimately the residents, whilst neither of them has any legal binding on the Parish Council.
A Parish Poll could be as low as £5000 – £10000, but it could also be much higher as per a recent Parish Poll in Salisbury. This was predicted to be £18000 but ended up costing taxpayers nearly £40000.
All without any binding result. (Source Salisbury City parish poll cost taxpayers nearly £40,000 | Salisbury Journal).
7 Comments
Headline should read.
Two ‘entitied’ parish councillors who aren’t getting their own way because they can’t grasp the fact they are a minority on a democratically run council therefore risk always being out voted, continue to throw their toys out of the pram.
Yes! I 100% agree on this! 🙌🏻
A Resident’s Response to the Warrington Worldwide Article
As a local resident, I found the Warrington Worldwide article about the upcoming Parish Meeting very disappointing. It repeats a lot of dramatic claims without checking whether they’re true, and it leaves out important context that residents deserve to know.
This meeting isn’t “unique” or “unprecedented”
The article repeats the idea that this is the first Parish Meeting ever held in Culcheth and Glazebury. That’s simply not true.
We have a Parish Meeting every year.
It’s a normal, legally required part of how parish councils work.
Anyone who has been a councillor for several years should already know this.
It’s worrying that the article didn’t bother to check such a basic fact.
Strong accusations are printed with no evidence at all
The article repeats claims about “secrecy”, “contempt”, “closed shops”, and “anti‑democracy coalitions”, but gives zero examples to back any of it up.
If a newspaper is going to publish accusations that serious, it should challenge them or ask for proof. Instead, the article just prints them as if they’re fact.
That’s not responsible reporting.
Important background is missing
The article gives a lot of space to two councillors who have been openly critical of the Parish Council for a long time, but it doesn’t mention anything that might help readers understand the wider context.
For example:
One of the councillors has repeatedly criticised the Parish Council before, during, and after his election campaign.
The other previously resigned from his political party after a confidentiality breach.
These details matter because they help residents understand that this isn’t a neutral, objective situation—it’s part of an ongoing dispute. Leaving that out makes the article feel biased.
The article gives a misleading impression of what the meeting can actually do
A Parish Meeting cannot remove the Parish Council or force any changes. Any vote taken is non‑binding.
A Parish Poll—if someone calls for one—could cost residents £5,000 to £40,000 or more, depending on staffing and turnout. And even then, the result still isn’t legally binding.
These are important facts, yet the article barely mentions them.
The Parish Council’s information isn’t “disinformation”
The Council has published factual explanations about:
what a Parish Meeting is
what it can and can’t do
how much a Parish Poll might cost
how the law works
That’s not a “disinformation campaign”—it’s just giving residents the facts so they can make informed decisions.
Residents deserve balanced reporting, not political drama
The article reads more like a platform for two councillors with long‑standing grievances than a balanced piece of journalism. Their claims are repeated without question, while the Council’s response is squeezed in at the end.
As residents, we rely on local news to give us facts—not to stir up division or amplify personal disputes.
You clearly are blinkered in your response with your own agenda – the Parish council’s response to the claims of a “unique parish meeting” which we put in quotes to illustrate the words of Neil Johnson, – not ours. We have covered both sides of the story in full – how more balanced can we be? There are clearly two factions here and we give air time to both. Are you suggesting we should censor what is sent to us? For the record – from my understanding a Parish Meeting, which has been called, is different to the Annual Parish meeting, which takes place every year.
Not really – A parish meeting is a generic term for a gathering of local government electors of the parish, which could EITHER be the required annual meeting or a special meeting called at another time such as this charade.
More or less the same but legally a Parish Council must have an Annual Parish Meeting that occurs between 1st March and 1st June. They usually review the past year in the parish.
Apart from that they are essentially identical.
They must follow the standard notice and procedural rules and the chair ‘controls’ the meeting as any chair would for any public meeting.
Anyone can attend and all decisions are not legally binding on the council.
Amazing that even when the Parish Council has confirmed what a Parish Meeting is and how they work, the editor still wants to take Cllr Johnson’s word for it. I understand not many people will have been aware of the Annual Parish Meeting nor of their rights to a parish poll, but they have been going on for decades and indeed the Parish Meeting held every year is the same in every way as the one called this time. The rules are complicated and outdated, but they are all there in the Local Government Act 1972.
Amazing that you don’t understand that I can’t change a direct quote from someone, which you have responded to, or it wouldn’t make sense or be in context – but gave the opportunity for a reply which was published in full. As you say, it is all outdated and complicated and most people don’t know anything about what a parish meeting is and its legality. Most parish councils don’t try and dictate to the press what they can and can’t do. If I have published anything unlawful, you know the process.