Now, to me that in itself is not evidence that the councillors are not doing enough, or doing a poor job. After all, it's not all about huffing and puffing and debate for the sake of it is not going to help Liverpool to move ahead. But surely, there should be something to debate at every meeting, after all they only happen once every three weeks.

And arguably, if this method of approving everything the council officers suggest was the right way to go, it would have seen the city make some improvements during the Administrator's time at the reigns. Surely following her path will see Liverpool stagnate in the same position for another four years, yet again, or possibly even longer. But does that mean that the councillors need to simply be more vocal, or should they be working harder behind the scenes to make changes? Is it that some members of the public can't see their hard work, rather than that it's not happening?

Ms Waller said this week that council meetings are not a circus and if people are coming along to them to watch councillors fight, they have got the wrong idea.

``We have briefing sessions before every council meeting that's opened to the public,'' Ms Waller said.

``Sometimes those sessions go for hours and councillors ask a lot of the questions they have about the agenda items and debate many of the issues surrounding them at that point.

``So by the time we get to the meeting all of their questions have been answered and most of their concerns have been addressed, so there is no need to discuss them again.

``What's important is that decisions are being made and things are going smoothly.

``The meetings are not about putting on a show for people, they're about getting things done and quickly, so I have no problem with the length of that meeting, I think that means that things are going well.

``I think everyone also needs to remember that we are tied by a very strict local government act so we can't just make decisions in isolation, we have to work with what the officers recommend.

``If people come to the council meeting expecting to be entertained, they've got the wrong idea about our role.''

Inspire Church pastor Henry Jacotine, who has gone to every council meeting since the new representatives were elected, said this week that he was dismayed that the meeting was so short.

``I feel that the amount of time that it went for just wasn't long enough,'' Mr Jacotine said.

``How can the councillors get through all of the problems that we have here in Liverpool in such a short time?''

``I think that when they have nothing to talk about they should open the floor up for more public submissions at the end of the meeting, so the people that are committed enough to come to the meetings can get to express what their passionate about.

``I think the councillors shouldn't forget that they were voted in by the public and we want to see what they're doing.

``It's important for the council to be as transparent as possible so that the public can see that they're working on for us.

``I think that if they know there won't be much discussion on in a meeting they could also prepare a status report about how their works are going around town, for example how their progressing with their fight against graffiti.''

Councillor Gary Lucas said he was amazed when he heard how short the meeting was.

``I was away that week, but when I heard it was only 10 minutes I couldn't believe it.

``It's atrocious, I can guarantee you that it won't be happening on my watch, that's just not acceptable.

``The people of Liverpool deserve more than that, they deserve councillors that are willing to stand up and speak out for them.''

Cr Lucas has previously said that he's also not going to simply approve whatever the council officers suggest, but rather investigate it himself as well. Because he doesn't think that the councillors are simply there to agree with the officers.

Liverpool Community Independents Team Councillor Nadia Napoletano said that she thinks the people that were disappointed with the length of the meeting don't have a clear understanding of how council operates.

``Because we have the preliminary briefing sessions about a week before the meeting, we sort out a lot of the questions and issues we have with each matter on the agenda before the meeting,'' Cr Napoletano said.

``And that's very handy, I much prefer to do things that way.

``During the session we feel more comfortable in asking the general manager a lot of questions and all sorts of questions as well.

``Some of the councillors are not experienced so they need a bit of guidance and it's more appropriate for this to be done in a closed meeting.

``But no decisions can be made in those closed meetings, so even though councillors may be leaning a certain way, it is against the act for them to reveal their views at that stage.

``And of course they can change their minds again before the meeting.''

Councillor Napoletano said that it is completely acceptable for council to carry most of the motions placed before it.

``After all, the recommendations are put together by council staff, who are very experienced in their field.

``Councillors are not town planners, we don't have engineering experience, or experience dealing with all of the government acts effecting council, so it's only reasonable that we would take the advise of officers, who are experienced in these matters, in most cases.''

I've got to say that I find this last argument very reasonable, councillors really aren't qualified in these fields and they need to take a significant amount of guidance from officers. But I do think it's a shame that the public can not be privy to these closed discussions that councillors are having before the official meeting. Oh to be a fly on the wall. I bet that there are some fireworks in the chambers on those occasions. And appart from that, maybe some true discussion and some debate about Liverpool's future.

It would be good for Liverpudlians to see this first hand, but we do get an insight of the councillors thinking at the meetings, if we watch carefully. And I for one am very happy that they are so dignified and well bahaved. It would be embarrassing if Liverpool returned to the ways of previous councils, or became like councils in other areas, where meetings devolve into sledging matches where councillors scream at each other across the room.

Councillor Napoletano said that she used to be an avid observer of council before the appointment of the Administrator.

``It was amazing, they would hurl abuse at each other at the top of their lungs,'' Ms Napoletanos said.

``And mostly they would be attacking the two independents; it just wasn't right.''

So we don't want to return to that, but a bit of healthy debate would be good, for sure. But as I said above, although it is important, it's not the only element that makes for an effective council.

It's more about what they accomplish, it's about true change, rather than the length of meetings. I would be happy if all of their meetings went for only five minutes but Liverpool started to move forward. If the councillors work in the background lobbying for infrastructure, working to fix roads, spend rates appropriately and put Liverpool on the map for business and investment, then it won't matter how short the meetings are. At the end of the day, it's results that count.