On 24 Apr 2021 11:51:47 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

snip

But they can 'turn up' then and be party to what's going on?

They're not a party to what is going on. They're a spectator.

Nice try but no cigar:

"party to (something)
Involved in something, often something clandestine."

Attendance is being 'involved in'.

Even if
they aren't (always) allowed to actively participate the chances are
any discussions are likely to (try to) stay above board if there are
people with a vested / counter interest present.

Their presence won't change anything since (a) such meetings are minuted

Ah, and the minutes are a complete transcription of everything that
was said, intimated and gestured are they?

and
the minutes are publicly available (b)

Irrelevant. See above.

the press will likely be present

Part of my point re potential 'impact'

and
(c) so will oppostion councillors on at least most councils.

And part of my question, where there *are* no opposition councillors.

So a non elected councilor could attend and is likely to make a
(passive) impact on proceedings.

If they're not elected then they're not a councillor. Perhaps you mean
"candidate".

Probably (luckily you understood my point).

Or they might not bother to attend at all, as per Farrige at the EU
meetings (whilst still snouting expenses and getting his EU pension no
doubt)?

Certainly Farage was snouting - along with the other 700-odd MEPs and
countless officials in the Commission etc.

Ah, but he was our 'sovereign one. ;-)

And by doing so and showing how
easy it was and how there was no oversight and no accountablity,

Which isn't actually true of course.

he showed how
rotten the entire structure was and remains so to this day.

Whist benefiting from it personally. Hypocrisy anyone?

So, what have we learned so far.

Anyone can turn up to (most?) council meetings and monitor the
progress (and therefore potentially impact the outcome, even if not
allowed to directly participate) therefore being a councillor may not
offer any real advantage.

Councillors are unlikely to champion any cause that is proven to be
beneficial to the people, (like their health, the environment and
animal suffering) if it conflicts with their own morals and ethics.

So, the conclusion could be that only maybe a coalition of 'parties'
may be worth having but could in turn hamper and positive projects
'because'.

eg, The whole thing is a cluster**** and therefore I have no interest
in it (outside 'making the effort' to spoil my paper etc).

Cheers, T i m