Must all discussions between any group of councilors be carried out in public?

Question

If so, I can’t understand how we can handle the following scenarios, which involve discussion about personally sensitive matters. Any advice?

1. Planning/discussing how we should most tactfully deal with a fellow councillor who is not performing a function very well. 
2. Considering what to do about possible/perceived failings of an organisation in our village, which is associated with a valuable PC asset. We don’t want to upset or antagonise them by having them hear our discussion. 
3. Discuss whether to accept or reject a quotation for some work that’s been submitted by a parishioner. I fear that they would take offence to some of the discussion. 
4. Discussing possible ways to improve efficiency of the Parish Council by assigning tasks or setting up possible working groups. In this we would be admitting to our own faults and failings which is embarrassing to do in public.

If we weren’t parish councillors we’d sit around a table and discuss these things over a cup of tea. Brainstorming possibly stupid ideas, and debating the pros and cons of possible solutions. Not to be able to have a sensible adult discussion like this seems crazy and inefficient. 

Answer 1

i believe the public and press must be allowed at all council meetings unless there was a motion and voted to exclude them ,in this case its usually a staff related matter . anything else could be subject to a written public interest test the information commissioner  states that the default position should be the assumption  in favour of  public interest
in addition the nolan principles of conduct in  public life are difficult to reconcile with in effect secret meetings

Answer 2

As Spartan has said, there needs to be a formal resolution to exclude the public in accordance with the provisions of the Public Bodies (Admission to Meetings) Act and the reason for the exclusion needs to be identified.  Generally, embarrassment is not a valid reason but a discussion on staff related matters such as disciplinary matters or salary discussions would be a valid reason.  In the scenarios you've identified, I'd question the council's power to act for no. 1 in accordance with the Ledbury case.  2 might be valid (difficult to say without knowing more about the relationship.  3 is often, but not always taken in private session on the grounds of being commercially sensitive and I'd argue 4 would definitely not meet the criteria for being in private session.  You also need to remember that whilst the discussion can be confidential, the decisions cannot.   Formal meetings at which decisions are taken must be held in public.