DEMOCRACY could be threatened by changes to a council's regulations, it has been warned.

Earlier this month Woodstock Town Council voted to change the way motions – requests made by councillors – are put before the rest of the body.

Now those who want to submit motions must have the support of a second councillor in advance of a meeting if they are to state their request, rather than being able to secure a seconder during a debate.

Supporters have said it prevents motions doomed to receive no support from being discussed at length and wasting time – but one councillor expressed serious concerns about its implications.

Sharone Parnes, has challenged the change to standing orders and urged the council to retain its previous system.

Mr Parnes, who points out that he is not aware of any other council in Oxfordshire with a similar regulation, worries the new orders will reduce transparency.

He said: “It’s better for a council to arrive at outcomes after floating ideas in open session of a properly convened meeting.

"Instead they could be being compelled to orchestrate proposals through behind-the-scenes phone calls and emails among select participants.

"A proposer could then be tempted or subjected to pressure to accept trade-offs and compromises for a version of a proposal that other people may then never know about.

“Also, if no councillor seconds a motion that was properly submitted and within council’s remit, and council therefore does not wish to even have it discussed, then that situation should be overtly evident at a properly convened meeting.

"It should not be disguised behind the requirement for a seconder in advance, which in essence has the same effect of requiring a second proposer.

“The newly and improperly resolved standing order is more indicative of camouflage than transparency.”

Mayor Patricia Redpath put forward the motion, seconded by former mayor Elizabeth Poskitt, at a meeting of the council earlier this month.

It requested this amendment to a standing order: “No motion may be moved at a meeting unless the subject to which it relates is on the agenda and/or the mover and seconder have given written notice of its wording to the council’s proper officer at least seven clear days before the meeting.”

Mr Parnes also noticed the problems that could face a new member of the council.

He added: “A newly joining councillor after a by-election will logically have greater challenge in ringing up and chasing round for a seconder, compared to, say, the mayor, who has a colleague councillor resident in her own household.”

When questioned on the issue by Mr Parnes, Mrs Redpath conceded she was not aware of another council that had similar standing orders in place but said that was not the point.

She said councillors should focus on why it was submitted.

She noted that in the council’s December meeting motions were explained for a total of nine minutes, only to be dropped after finding no seconder.

Mrs Redpath could not be reached for further comment.