Question

Can a Parish Clerk demand that an email to a resident regarding PC actions is kept confidential [closed]

Answer 1

A bit more context is needed.

If you mean you are a resident, and the clerk has written to you about actions that the Parish Council have taken, then no the clerk cannot demand that you keep the email confidential.They may politely request that you do, but you can politely decline that request. Councillors agree to be bound by the Code of Conduct - one thing they agree to is transparency.

Answer 2

You really need to rephrase the question which, as it stands, makes very little sense…

I used to think questions like this were clickbait but I’ve come to realise there really is a fundamental lack of understanding of local council business and a general inability to effectively communicate in written or spoken form…

Comments

I realised that the question didn’t make complete sense but couldn’t see how to amend it. Thanks for pointing it out and talking down to me so nicely.
So yes. A query was made to the Clerk and a reply was given that included a paragraph at the end stating that the email must be kept confidential and not forwarded or copied.

---

You might be better directing your energy towards presenting a credible ((*) question rather than getting all melt about making a ((*) of yourself

---

Was the paragraph in an email signature by any chance?

---

Yes it was after the signature and an automatic “add on”.
“The contents of this e-mail (and any attachments) are confidential to the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed and may also be legally  privileged.  If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any form whatsoever.  If you have received this e-mail in error please e-mail the sender”

---

Thanks very much. It confirms exactly what I was thinking although you articulate it a lot better than me. Thanks.

---

The 3x votes AND the supplementary comment above are all the evidence needed that my original post was entirely on point.
Melts get all hair shirt when presented with the uncomfortable but irrefutable truth….

---

Were you bullied at school? If you look closely, the x3 are all negative!

---

In my experience, most Parish Councils have at least one RoundAgainCoxn. They're people who crave power but have no discernible skills to achieve it in a world outside of extreme voter apathy and automatic re-elections. It should be a privilege to serve, but people like this make it a chore for everyone else on a council. They will treat everyone with disdain, fool themselves into believing they're liked/popular/knowledgeable and are entirely ignorant to the sad truth that others merely tolerate them and generally can't be bothered to argue with them.

---

Well said BG.  For the reasons you have outlined, I decided months ago that I would not enter into discussion with RAC.

---

That automatic signature is actually brilliant. Those things are almost impossible to enforce anyway. You're not bound to it because you're not beholden to the Parish Council (i.e. you're not an employee, councillor or have some other contract with them where there might be a reasonable degree of discretion expected). Even if you were, in most situations the only legal recourse for the Council would be to to sue on a claim you've republished their intellectual material (essentially a copyright infringement). What makes this signature particularly brilliant though is that they state any claim of confidentiality only applies if you're not the intended recipient. As you are the intended recipient, there's absolutely nothing to suggest in that signature that you can't spread whatever they've said wherever you like. The whole point of those things is to try to protect any potential confidential information contained in the email (such as your name) being sent to the wrong person.