CANDIDATES vying for seats in the general election have been asked to throw their weight behind the City of York Council's Fair Grant for York campaign.
Senior councillors have long argued that the Government has short-changed York for years.
They say that extra cost pressures, such as having to meet environment and social service demands, mean the Guildhall is several million pounds short just to provide current levels of services.
Liberal Democrat Andrew Waller, deputy leader of the council, tabled the motion for support at last night's full council meeting.
He also called for election contenders to state their views on wide-ranging issues from council tax to care services for the elderly and moves to reduce waste.
But a major row has erupted with opposition councillors branding the motion "unlawful" electioneering by the Lib Dems.
Highlighting the May 5 election, Labour leader Dave Merrett said all candidates should have an equal right to speak on a public platform.
He insisted: "The use of the council chamber as a public platform does not meet that basic test of fairness or equity."
Labour's Coun Sandy Fraser criticised the motion as "an abuse of council procedures" and "a shameful, opportunistic debate".
However, council leader Steve Galloway, Lib Dem, said: "This debate is taking place because of independent legal advice which was communicated to the Labour Party on Monday. That advice could have been challenged by anyone before this meeting."
After further legal advice, the council chief executive, David Atkinson, agreed the motion could be discussed.
"It is my view that the council is not providing support for candidates. It is considering motions that we have been advised may lawfully be moved and debated."
The advice did not sit easily with some opposition councillors including the Green Party's Andy D'Agorne, who walked out after declaring a prejudicial interest as a prospective candidate in the election.
Coun David Scott said he disagreed with the advice and the chief executive's decision, while Coun Paul Blanchard pledged to write to the Electoral Commission about the council's actions.
Coun Viv Kind warned that the decision to debate the motion may hit the council in its purse as well as its reputation if it was later proved incorrect.
Defending the motion, Coun Waller said: "It is not unreasonable that we as a council should be able to ask the candidates in this forthcoming election their views."
But Coun Mark Hill said the motion was an opportunity to promote particular policies at a time of an election.
"This agenda is utterly geared to what the Liberal Democrats want to say. That's so unprincipled, and I am stunned you are doing it."
Although the motion was carried, several opposition councillors asked for their decision not to vote to be recorded.
Coun Derek Smallwood said: "I consider it unlawful. I am concerned that if this is subsequently proved to be illegal I don't want in any way to be involved with any legal costs incurred."
Updated: 10:41 Friday, April 15, 2005
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