We welcome this in-depth reporting by Hastings Online Times and Bernard McGinley on the growing concerns around Helena Dollimore MP’s petition activity and data practices.
The article reflects what many residents have already told us: they signed petitions in good faith, expecting their voice to count on a local issue, but never heard anything back. In other cases, people said they were put off signing altogether because there was no clear opt-out or explanation of how their personal information would be used.
This is not a party-political issue. It is a question of transparency and trust.
We have submitted a formal Freedom of Information request and a separate data protection complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office. These are measured, legal steps available to any member of the public — not political attacks. If there is nothing to hide, the responses will clarify that.
But the longer the silence continues, the more serious the questions become. As the article points out, we are now seeing similar practices extended to so-called public meetings, where access is restricted unless residents hand over their personal details. That is not democratic engagement — it is managed participation through data collection.
We urge Helena Dollimore MP and the Labour Party to publish:
- A list of which petitions were submitted and to whom
- What outcomes, if any, were achieved
- A clear explanation of what happens to signatories’ data
- A commitment to data transparency moving forward
Because yes, it is a sign of a healthy democracy when elected representatives engage with the public. But it is also a sign of a strong democracy when residents are able to ask fair questions and receive full, honest answers in return.
We will continue to do our part to protect the public interest.