Secret meeting

On 17 August 2009, Icklesham Parish Council held its out-of-term summer meeting. A meeting in August meeting was originally introduced expressly for the purpose of signing cheques that could not wait until September and, it was agreed that no other items should be tabled, given that August is a traditional holiday month and not all councillors would be able to attend.
This year, however, an extra item was, at the last minute, added to the agenda, "Matters relating to winchelsea.net website". Moreover, it was decided that the precise nature of these matters and the discussion of them would be confidential.
It was puzzling as to why the issue was regarded as so urgent that it could not wait just four weeks, until the resumption of normal Council business in September. Was it coincidental that Winchelsea ward councillors had earlier indicated that they would not be able to attend?
As it was, all three Winchelsea ward councillors were able to attend. One made a statement outlining the law surrounding the issue under discussion. It was clear that other councillors were totally unaware of the relevant law, despite being asked to make a decision with potentially dire financial consequences for the Council. The statement caused some consternation in the Council and subsequently one councillor complained that Winchelsea councillors "had been prepared". It transpired that members of the Council had sought external advice on the issue. However, neither the request for advice, nor the advice itself, were in writing. Indeed, the advisors concerned reportedly did not wish to give their advice in writing. With no text to consult and without the advisors being present, the Council was unable to answer fairly fundamental questions on whether the advice had addressed certain material points of law.
With the Council refusing to pass on the points raised by the Winchelsea councillors to its advisors, the issue has petered out, but serious issues of principle remain to be answered. Was the Council attempting an "ambush" of Winchelsea councillors by bringing, at the eleventh-hour, an item, supposedly of great import but not of any urgency, to the agenda of a meeting which is not intended for substantive business, which some Winchelsea councillors were expected to be able to attend and for which it was hoped Winchelsea councillors would be unprepared? Should advice on matters claimed to be so serious be sought and accepted verbally? Why were the Council's advisors not asked to attend? Should councillors make a decision on such matters when they do not understand the legal issues and financial consequences? Why did Council consider exposing itself to such a serious financial risk, instead of trying first to resolve the matter by a phone call?
Unsurprisingly, the meeting satisified no one. An unfortunate remark by the Chairman after the closing of  the meeting sparked a heated exchange (and more) between councillors. Fortunately, no members of the public were in attendance or the Council would have brought itself into utter disrepute.