BRADFORD on Avon residents who were outraged at the prospect of being permanently excluded from Neighbourhood Plan Working Group meetings, after being barred from Monday’s meeting, now say they are satisfied they will only be banned when "commercially sensitive" issues are being discussed.

Despite Monday night’s meeting at the town council’s offices being open to members of the press and public, the six working group members agreed the meeting should be held in private. The meeting was discussing site allocations of proposed development sites, which will help decide which land around the town is used for homes, businesses and leisure in the future.

The only member of the press and public present was a Wiltshire Times reporter, who was asked to leave.

On Tuesday at the Full Council meeting, dismayed residents spoke out about what they thought was a blanket ban from all future Neighbourhood Plan meetings.

Five of the eight members of the public at Tuesday’s full council meeting expressed strong opposition to what they thought was a universal ban for public meetings, including Annette Seekings, of Church Street, who has been an active member of the community since 1968.

“This is a seriously retrograde and undemocratic step for this council to take,” she said. “Such an action taken by the council strongly suggests that meetings held behind closed doors might have something to hide from the neighbourhood it serves.”

Before the meeting Mike Wilson, of Palairet Close, Bradford, who is worried at the prospect of development on the Beehive Field, off Trowbridge Road, which is currently agricultural land, said: “This isn’t a sign of local democracy. They are a public body and open to scrutiny.” Mr Wilson also objected to being asked to leave a Neighbourhood Plan work group meeting on November 18 over the same issue.

“A public body shouldn’t be discussing private matters, it opens a can of worms and I don’t know how we can stop it. It isn’t right to be welcomed one minute and ejected the next.

“It shouldn’t be discussed behind closed doors. If they have nothing to hide, we should know about all of it.”

Under the 1960 Public Bodies Act, the council is within its rights to exclude the public and press whenever publicity is prejudicial to the public interest by reason of the confidential nature of the business to be transacted.

After a lengthy discussion at Full Council, residents were satisfied with councillors’ explanation that for some issues, such as issues of commercial sensitivity, the public could be excluded.

After the meeting Mrs Seekings added: “It was probably a misunderstanding. Cllr Allison was put into difficulty with developers. We thought we’d be excluded for all meetings but they have listened to us and resolved it the issue.”