LABOUR members of the opposition on Thurrock Council have made another bid to derail the ruling Conservative administration's plan to create new Civic office in Grays and demolish part of the existing council HQ to make way for flats.

The controversial scheme for the civic offices, which Conservatives see as a lynch-pin of their hopes to regenerate Grays – and particularly its High Street has been a hot topic for several years but is moving ever closer to reality as the council has begun work to clear buildings it bought up for the expansion – and has given itself the permission it requires to build on top of a memorial garden.

Last week's cabinet meeting, when members granted permission to take "necessary administrative and accounting steps" to "appropriate" Mulberry Square to build new council offices appears to have galvanised local opposition to try one more time to stop the scheme.

Labour members and the local residents association were particularly angry that regeneration portfolio holder Cllr Mark Coxshall brushed aside opposition, claiming that the campaign against the civic office rebuild was merely political point-scoring by Labour councillors and the public were not against the scheme.

He described the fact that there was no formal response to a public notice about the Mulberry Square move as 'fantastic' news.

In the wake of that Labour members have 'called in' the cabinet's decision for review by the full council.

Their argument is that local residents have been 'denied an opportunity to have meaningful say on the wasteful plans to build plush news offices for councillors'.

That argument was backed up by the Chair of the Seabrooke Estate Residents Association, Richard Suttling, who says: "My neighbours and I can't believe that the council are celebrating the lack of responses to the consultation. Everyone knows how local people feel about this monstrous waste of money. What makes it even worse is the fact that the residents of Grays hold Mulberry Square so close to their hearts.

"We call on the Council to engage with us and allow us to make our voices heard."

Grays Riverside Labour ward councillor Tony Fish, added: "We are outraged that the Tories are so proud that a flawed consultation has yielded no responses. What did they really expect? Our residents deserve a full, open and well-publicised consultation on this.

"Myself and fellow ward councillors Martin Kerin and Jane Pothecary have submitted a ',all In' and expect the Tory-led Thurrock Council to allow our residents a voice."

Thurrock Council has responded officially to the Labour action with the following statement: "The council will consider the call-in request in line with the constitution and respond in due course."

Cllr Coxshall, who has previously expressed his aversion to getting involved in 'dog-whistle' public exchanges of rhetoric, was offered the opportunity to comment but declined.

What is a 'call-in'?

[I]From time to time, the ruling Cabinet may take a decision that causes concern to some councillors to such an extent that they believe the decision should be changed. The Local Government Act 2000 requires every council to establish a mechanism which allows for executive decisions made but not yet implemented to be 'called in' for consideration by scrutiny.

This includes decisions taken by Cabinet (collective or individual) or decisions delegated to Chief Officers.

Call-in is intended to be used in exceptional circumstances for decisions believed to be contrary to the authority's decision making principles. By its nature it acts as a delaying mechanism.[.L]

The decision to press ahead with the civic offices rebuild has already been rejected by the relevant Overview and Scrutiny Committee and a vote at full council calling for the scheme to be scrapped was won by a majority of opposition members. However, such a decision is not binding on the council cabinet, which has the power to over-ride a full council decision - which it did in relation to the rebuilding.

The call-in will be considered by senior council officers, who - as the matter has already been extensively debated and the cabinet is steadfast in its decision-making - may choose to reject the call in.