The leader of Wolverhampton City Council has demanded an apology from a Reform UK councillor over comments made about a colleague with cancer. Councillor Anita Stanley faced fierce backlash at a full council meeting on June 25 after she said granting a dispensation order for a colleague battling cancer was ‘unfair on taxpayers’. The order, now approved, means Labour Councillor Carol Hyatt can continue to be a member without attending council meetings in person. READ MORE: The hidden truth about knife crime uncovered as children groomed by gangs with expensive trainers Councillor Stanley has since said statements of her being ‘uncompassionate’ are ‘categorically false’, and said her thoughts are with Councillor Hyatt and her family. Under the Local Government Act, all local councillors are required to attend meetings within a six-month period to avoid disqualification. Councils do have the power to grant dispensation orders for medical or other valid reasons but it must be voted on by elected members. If it wasn鈥檛 approved, it would have resulted in a by-election for the Merry Hill ward at an estimated cost of 拢30,000. It was noted at the meeting that Councillor Hyatt is still effective in representing the people of Merry Hill and is continuing to take on case work despite her illness. Councillor Stanley, speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, said that the Labour-led council’s decision to grant the order was a ‘political calculation’ to avoid a by-election. She added that if a by-election was to occur, the Labour seat in Merry Hill would be ‘lost to Reform UK. Councillor Stanley called on Wolverhampton Labour ‘to stop using personal health matters as a political shield’. At the council meeting, Councillor Stanley said: “I do not feel it is very fair on the residents not to have a political representative to be able to speak up for them for the period of effectively one whole year. It鈥檚 not fair on taxpayers.鈥 The statement sparked angry reactions from several councillors from the Labour Group. Leader of the authority, Councillor Stephen Simkins, Bilston South, branded the comments made by Councillor Stanley as a 鈥榙isgrace鈥. He said: 鈥淚 hope it never happens to you or any of your family. I support this motion, wholeheartedly. We should not resort to the gutter, like we鈥檝e just heard. Casting aspersions on people who are suffering from life-threatening illnesses. Shame on you.鈥 Deputy leader, Councillor Steve Evans, Fallings Park, added: 鈥淚 remind Councillor Stanley that representing residents is more than just coming in this chamber. Councillor Hyatt, to her credit, has been available for her residents; she鈥檚 still doing case work, she鈥檚 been attending meetings online. 鈥淪he might not be here tonight but she speaks for her residents loud and clear. Unlike some people who speak for themselves and take cheap shots.鈥 Councillor Bhupinder Gakhal, Blakenhall, added: 鈥淚t really hurts and annoys me that a human being can come out with a comment like that. Point scoring on somebody鈥檚 health, that is absolutely disgraceful.鈥 Councillor Philip Bateman, Wednesfield North, said: 鈥淪adly, I鈥檝e got cancer. If you鈥檝e got cancer, you will miss meetings. But it doesn鈥檛 mean you鈥檙e not doing your job that the electors put you there to do. 鈥淵ou may not want her there because she鈥檚 effective, but her own electorate does. And come the elections when she has to stand, the electorate will make their decision.鈥 Councillor Jeszemma Howl, Ettingshall North, said: 鈥淚f you know Carol, you will know she is unstoppable and effective. 鈥淭o do anything other than agree to this dispensation order would not only be cruel, it could be illegal under the Equalities Act. The word equality isn鈥檛 very popular in Reform.鈥 The debate was brought to an end when the chamber descended into chaos following comments from Councillor Hibbert, Independent, Penn ward. She spoke about Councillor Hyatt’s plans to stand in the next local elections, and said the members in favour of the dispensation order were doing so to avert a by-election. Councillor Hibbert was asked by the mayor, Councillor Craig Collingswood, to withdraw the statements twice, but she refused. All but two councillors voted in favour to grant Councillor Hyatt the dispensation order. Councillor Stanley and Councillor Hibbert abstained. Speaking to the LDRS, Councillor Stanley said: “I am aware of recent statements being circulated by some members of Wolverhampton Labour suggesting that I have been uncompassionate toward a colleague currently undergoing cancer treatment. I wish to address this misinformation directly and unequivocally. “First and foremost, I express my sincere sympathy for my colleague and her ongoing health challenges. A cancer diagnosis is profoundly difficult, and my thoughts continue to be with her and her family during this time. “The suggestion that I have shown a lack of compassion is categorically false and politically motivated. My concern has always been, and remains, for her wellbeing 鈥 including her right to make personal decisions about her role free from political pressure. “Therefore, when Wolverhampton Labour presented the paper for dispensation, with no supporting statement from this colleague, the proposal invariably appeared to me, to be influenced not by her personal welfare, but by the Wolverhampton Labour’s reluctance to trigger a by-election 鈥 which polling suggests they will lose to my Party, Reform UK. “So let me reiterate, I have not, at any time, sought to exploit my colleague鈥檚 situation. Rather, I have spoken in good faith about what appears to be a political calculation that comes at the expense of a very human and deeply personal struggle. “I urge Wolverhampton Labour to stop using personal health matters as a political shield and to allow individuals to make the decisions that are best for them, free from possible undue influence. “I remain committed to respectful and compassionate dialogue and to serving our community of Wolverhampton with integrity.”