Council buys £100k barriers at its Aylesbury base after ‘number of security incidents’

Four ‘speed lanes’ were fitted in the reception of the unitary authority’s Gateway headquarters on Gatehouse Road, Aylesbury in October 2024.

The barriers allow staff to enter by scanning their ID cards but stop members of the public passing freely into the building, which hosts council meetings and the office of council leader Martin Tett.

The council confirmed its new security measures in response to a freedom of information (FOI) request by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS).

Its response read: “There have been a number of incidents which we have managed and been successful to avoid escalating.

“Taking this into consideration and ongoing security escalations globally have led us to improve security arrangements in our buildings.”

However, the barriers were not closed during a full council meeting at the Gateway in November, according to Councillor Frank Mahon.

The Conservative told the chamber at the time: “A few weeks or months ago we put in all singing, all dancing security barriers out the front. I’ve just gone out for a break at half past six and the barriers are wide open.”

His interruption came after he received a text during the meeting about a security incident 18 miles away at the University of Buckingham, which later turned out to be a bomb hoax.

The November full council meeting was one of dozens that since April have been policed by security guards who are paid £17 to £20 per hour, the council confirmed in its FOI response.

Licensing committees, the general election count, Conservative and Liberal Democrat meetings and even the Buckinghamshire Fire and Rescue Awards are among the recent events the council has drafted in guards for.

And the guards have not gone unnoticed by councillors, including Julia Wassell, who questioned why security were present at a September meeting of the High Wycombe town committee.

During the meeting, the Wycombe Independent asked if the guard was there ‘to throw her out’ for speaking about the town not having its own council or if there was ‘some sort of threat’, but she was told by chairman Paul Turner ‘there was no specific threat’.

Councillor Wassell said this week that spending money on security for elections was ‘justified’ but questioned why meetings such as the town committee were being guarded.

She told the LDRS: “It was viewed that certain members of the public might be removed. One of the issues here is the low threshold for public debate.

“The tendency to ‘close down’ any opposition and not complete debates. This has led to councillors being told they will have to leave if they press a point.”

John Chilver, the council’s cabinet member for accessible housing and resources, told the LDRS it was ‘commonplace and good practice’ to have security in an office or public building and that the council’s security measures were under ‘constant review’.

He said: “The reality is that, unfortunately, there is a heightened security risk particularly for politicians and elected members, in addition to staff who sadly receive regular threats and as we know, in rare cases, have been subject to attack.

“Since installation, the barriers have been welcomed by users and at full body height cannot be easily jumped over.”