Parish Meeting cancelled by independents at Culcheth & Glazebury

TWO Independent councillors have cancelled what they had described as a “unique Parish Meeting” to discuss the current governance and leadership of Culcheth and Glazebury Parish Council.

Calling it an “unprecedented move” at the time, Cllrs Neil Johnson and Bernie Kingston said it would 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.
A spokesperson for Culcheth & Glazebury Parish Council responded at the time: “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).

Cllr Johnson and Cllr.Kingston later made the following announcement.

Public Statement From Cllrs Johnson & Kingston re the Cancellation of the Parish Meeting
“We are formally cancelling the Parish Meeting that we convened earlier this year in our capacity as Parish Councillors.
The request for this meeting was made by Cllr Johnson at the February Parish Council meeting and was followed up, the next day, in writing by Cllr Kingston on 11 February to ensure that arrangements could begin promptly. Under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12, Part III, residents have a statutory right to a Parish Meeting, and the Parish Council has a duty to ensure that such a meeting is arranged “at a time and place suitable for the inhabitants of the parish.” The legislation is clear: Parish Meetings must be accessible, timely, and free from obstruction.
Despite this, the Parish Council Chair delayed and failed to take the basic organisational steps required in a timely manner. By 24 April 2026 (the proposed date of the Parish Meeting), almost 10 weeks will have passed since the request was first made in the February PC meeting.
The date proposed is a Friday night, a timing that is neither reasonable nor consistent with the democratic purpose of a Parish Meeting. A Friday evening meeting predictably limits attendance for residents. It cannot credibly be described as “suitable for the inhabitants of the parish” as the law requires.
Compounding this, on 19 February 2026, the Parish Council published a Q&A statement on its website that presented a partial and misleading account of the Parish Meeting process. Rather than offering neutral information, the document framed the meeting in a way that discouraged participation and cast doubt on its legitimacy. This is not the role of a Parish Council, which should support—not influence—the statutory rights of residents to assemble and speak.
In addition, the potential presence of security personnel at the meeting raised serious concerns about the atmosphere residents would face on arrival.
Parish Meetings are intended to be open, welcoming, and community‑led. The possibility of security being stationed at the door risks creating an intimidating environment for those wishing to attend, particularly for residents who may already feel hesitant about speaking publicly.
These issues cannot be separated from the wider conduct that has characterised recent Parish Council meetings. If the behaviour displayed by the Chair and several Councillors in recent months were to set the tone for the Parish Meeting, residents could reasonably expect further examples of the hostile and discouraging environment that your Independent Councillors have endured. This has included dismissive comments, personal remarks, and behaviour that has made constructive participation extremely difficult. No Parish Meeting should take place under conditions that risk replicating such an atmosphere or deterring residents from speaking freely.
The Parish Council have also attempted to apply unfair and disproportionate costs to the organisation of the meeting and more importantly, a Parish Poll that may follow.
Parish Meetings are a statutory right of the electorate, not a discretionary event. To discredit the convening of a Parish Meeting on the basis of potential costs undermines the process of residents seeking to exercise their rights and contradicts both the spirit and the letter of the legislation.
Alongside these concerns, residents have now completed a petition for a Community Governance Review (CGR). This will trigger a formal process conducted by Warrington Borough Council, which is transparent, open, and independently managed. A CGR provides a structured and impartial route for examining governance arrangements, ensuring that residents’ voices are heard without the barriers, delays, or pressures that have characterised the handling of this Parish Meeting.
Taken together—the delay organising the Meeting, (almost 10 weeks will have passed), the publication of a biased Q&A by the Parish Council, the attempt to undermine the process based on costs, the likelihood of reduced resident capacity due to external attendees, the potential presence of security, and the wider pattern of conduct at recent council meetings—the process has been neither democratic nor transparent. It has not met the statutory requirement to support open participation by the parish electorate.
Given these circumstances, we cannot endorse a meeting arranged in a manner that restricts attendance, misinforms residents, and undermines the democratic intent of the law. We therefore withdraw our original convening request and will not proceed under the conditions imposed.
We remain committed to open, accountable local governance and to ensuring that residents have fair, accessible, and lawful opportunities to participate in parish affairs.