Why it matters: The revelation has sparked accusations that councillors are failing to represent their residents, with opposition members describing the situation as "deeply worrying" and claiming public debates are merely "theatre".
The big picture: The controversy centres on a council debate on Monday, 12 January, over how to respond to the Government's call for feedback on whether to postpone Suffolk's upcoming local elections in May. The call followed concerns from councils about a supposed lack of resources essential to delivering major reforms to local government.
The details: An amendment from opposition councillors proposed clear support for the elections going ahead as planned, but was turned down with 17 votes for, 39 against and four abstentions. All Conservative councillors present voted down the amendment, but none outside the administration's cabinet stood up to speak during the meeting.
Cllr Henry Lloyd later told Stradbroke parish councillors on Monday evening that he had voted down the amendment, despite supporting its premise, because the Conservative whip was not to give an opinion on the elections beforehand.
"My opinion is the election should go ahead, my view is also that I see politics as a team game," he said.
"Our group decided that the council shouldn't have an opinion on whether they [the elections] should or shouldn't go ahead. That was my decision at that point, whether I wanted to break from the group and break the whip and throw a tantrum in public about something that actually doesn't affect whether we have elections or not, or do I be a team player."
The whip is a political party's way of enforcing discipline, and breaking it is often associated with punishments such as suspensions.
What they're saying: Cllr Andrew Stringer, the leader of the main opposition group – made up of Green, Lib Dem and Independent councillors – called the situation deeply worrying.
"If it becomes a straight shove between those I represent and some awkward views from my party, my community always wins – the first duty is to represent those who elect you," he said.
"We are being told that we have a free and open debate when actually, what we are witnessing is theatre. The whole day felt Orwellian – 1984 was fiction, not a handbook."
Cllr Philip Faircloth-Mutton, who until recently had been a Conservative cabinet member before defecting to Reform in September, echoed the same concerns. He said the Conservative leadership would often put pressure on backbench councillors to vote in a certain way during private meetings and even limit who could speak during meetings.
"There were many times when you'd go around the room, and it'd be on the basis of this person would speak and nobody else speaks on this matter, we need to get a [Conservative] Group line on this," he said.
"It's deeply concerning for democracy and local residents that they've got Conservative representatives who are being bullied and pressured into not even speaking in the chamber. There's such a high degree of control in that Group."
Cllr Patti Mulcahy, whose defection to Reform was announced yesterday, shared similar criticisms and experiences.
"Sometimes it was requested that only certain people speak, especially in response to motions put forward by the opposition," she said. "I think it was telling at the meeting that only the cabinet members spoke, and not a single backbencher."
Cllr David Nettleton, an Independent, said the meeting had been a "bizarre spectacle".
"Those who protest at this censorship are threatened with suspension if they persist in challenging the executive," he said. "Gradually, meetings become rallies in support of the ruling elite. Representation of the people fades into the background as democratic debate is stifled."
For context: During the parish council meeting, Cllr Lloyd said councillors were encouraged to speak, but did not confirm this when later asked by the BBC's Local Democracy Reporting Service. Both him and Cllr Matthew Hicks, the council's Conservative leader, said they would not comment on internal group meetings and refused to provide any further details.
The bottom line: A Suffolk county councillor's public admission that he followed party orders over his own beliefs has exposed concerns about whether elected members are truly representing their communities, with critics warning that democratic debate is being stifled by party control.
