Richmondshire councillors have been denied the automatic right to learn the content of formal meetings between their leader and the authority's chief executive.

Colburn's Helen Grant asked a full meeting of Richmondshire District Council to back her suggestion that, in future, an agenda should be issued to all the authority's members, informing them of what leader John Blackie and chief executive, Harry Tabiner, would be discussing during their monthly head-to-heads.

But, after a 15-minute debate and a named vote, the council decided rank-and-file members should not expect any information other than that which the two agreed to release.

''I find it a shame that the majority of members are happy to be kept in the dark,'' said Councillor Grant, after her suggestion was defeated 15-12.

Councillor Grace Buckle was among those who supported her.

''People want to know what's going on and expect councillors to know; I will admit I have felt very inadequate recently when I have been able to tell them,'' she said.

Liberal Democrat leader, Councillor Richard Good, pointed out all members had access to Mr Tabiner and could take any issue they wished to him.

However, he added: ''All we are saying is that the content of these regular monthly meetings with the leader should be shared.''

Councillor Blackie pledged to do his best to improve the flow of information around the council - but remained equally adamant that his regular private meetings with Mr Tabiner should continue. ''This is a £10m business employing over 200 people and it is essential that the leader should be allowed to have confidential meetings with the executive core,'' he said.

Meanwhile, the same meeting voted to limit the public's right to question the authority.

In future, anyone raising an issue at a council meeting will be given three minutes rather than five to present their case while committee chairmen will be able to call an end to public question time after half an hour.

In addition, officers or councillors will not be identified if the question from the public constitutes a thinly-veiled personal attack on that individual.

Officers also suggested complaints should no longer be dealt with by the authority's standards committee, in line with guidance from the Local Government Ombudsman. However, the idea was rejected after Coun Blackie pressed the council to ensure it remained ''the pinnacle of the complaints procedure''.