Isle of Wight Council leader Phil Jordan has defended his actions after a video of a cabinet meeting went viral.

The video showed him rising to his feet and telling another council member he wasn't allowed to speak 

Scroll down to watch, from eight minutes in

The meeting got heated last Thursday, when the controversial Draft Island Planning Strategy (DIPS) was discussed, and Councillor Peter Spink, not a cabinet member, asked a couple of questions.

We asked Cllr Jordan for his response to criticism of his actions.

Cllr Jordan said: "Cllr Spink attended as a member of the council (not the cabinet) and is entitled to ask a question on the item being discussed. 

"He is not entitled to enter into any debate on any issue under consideration but he must abide by the rules of the constitution in attending and asking questions.

"Cllr Spink asked a question to which a reply was given by Cllr Fuller. Cllr Spink refused to accept the answer given and then asked a further question.

"In response to that further question I advised Cllr Spink that he would be given a written reply. This is standard acceptable protocol for questions asked 'without notice'.

"Cllr Spink refused to accept a written reply (he has no choice as it is constitutionally laid down as process) and would not move on with a second question.

"I repeatedly asked Cllr Spink if he had a second question. He continued to talk over the chair and refused to move on. 

"I then rose to my feet. This is a symbolic action on the part of the chair (as happened at a recent full council meeting where the chair, Cllr Claire Critchison, was forced to do exactly the same thing when Cllr Spink refused to stop speaking) and it indicates to those in the meeting they must stop speaking.

"This is all referenced in the IW Council Constitution under Rules of Debate clause.

"I fully understand that observers that do not understand the protocol of the chair standing (which means anyone speaking must cease) and can see the action as being something it is not. 

"However, the action of standing is not from any petulance or anger but from the protocols of the council for chairs when a member refuses to stop speaking.

"Seen in this context, my actions were completely acceptable within the council constitution and were needed to prevent Cllr Spink from continuing to speak.

"At no time did I shout at Cllr Spink and being firm and determined should not be seen as untoward behaviour when trying to run a meeting without the kind of disruption that Cllr Spink was intent on delivering."