Calls are growing in Gloucester for city councillors to be mandated to declare their membership in “secret societies” and private clubs. Labour councillors are spearheading a motion to change the council’s rules, requiring elected officials to openly disclose affiliations with exclusive membership organizations.
Councillor John Jones (Labour, Kingsway), leading the initiative, argues that the move will enhance transparency and rebuild public trust, which he describes as being at an all-time low amid recent concerns about the council’s finances.
Jones stated, “The Labour group is proposing a motion that will require all councillors to declare any memberships with private or secretive organizations under the council’s code of conduct. We believe that the people of Gloucester deserve transparency and accountability from their elected representatives.”
The proposal has received tentative support from the Liberal Democrats, with council leader Jeremy Hilton (LD, Kingsholm and Wotton) affirming, “We believe councillors should disclose memberships in groups like the Freemasons. Openness and transparency must be a priority—it’s what the public expects.”
However, the motion faces opposition from Conservative and Community Independent councillors. Stephanie Chambers (Conservative, Quedgeley Fieldcourt) criticized the proposal as unnecessary and an intrusion into councillors’ private lives. “Councillors already declare all legally required interests. This motion feels like an overreach, prying into personal social activities and affiliations unrelated to their public duties,” she said.
Alastair Chambers, leader of the Community Independents group and a freemason himself, voiced strong objections to the measure. “Forcing councillors to disclose every association encroaches on private life,” he argued. “While I have openly acknowledged my freemasonry, it was by choice. Compelling such disclosures risks undermining individual freedoms and echoes troubling periods in history when freemasonry was persecuted.”
The debate on this proposal is scheduled for the council’s full meeting on January 29, where councillors will weigh the merits of increasing transparency against concerns for privacy and personal freedom.