Agenda item

(Monitoring Officer) To  consider a report on consultation concerning the review of the Planning Protocol.

The Deputy Monitoring Officer reported on responses following consultation with District Councillors, Parish and Town Councils, Planning Agents and the Director of Planning and Economic Development on the need to review the Planning Protocol.

(a)        Cabinet Members – Conflict of Interest in Planning Matters

In relation to Paragraph 7.2 of the Protocol, attention had been drawn to two issues.  The District Council Housing Portfolio Holder had questioned the need to declare a prejudicial interest in a planning matter in relation to a scheme which had been approved before he had become the Portfolio Holder.  Officers had drawn attention to the review of Cabinet Portfolios for 2009/2010 as a result of which it was possible a number of different Portfolio Holders could be involved in the formulation of a proposal requiring planning permission. 

The Deputy Monitoring Officer drew attention to possible rewording requiring that a prejudicial interest should only apply if the member had been the appropriate Cabinet Member at the time the proposal had been agreed with references to Portfolio Holders in the plural in order to reflect the possible overlap of responsibilities.

Members discussed whether the interest could be affected by a time lapse between the two situations and whether by taking on the responsibility of a Portfolio the member became committed to a project even if not a party to the original decision.

(b)       Property Interests

The Deputy Monitoring Officer reported that the interpretation of Section 8 had been cited in a recent complaint about an alleged breach of the Code of Conduct.  He advised that the adjudication on that allegation had not yet been completed and suggested this part of the Protocol be reviewed in the light of the outcome.

(c)        Prejudicial Interests and the Councillor’s Representative Role

The Deputy Monitoring Officer drew attention to a query as to how to deal with a situation where more than one councillor sought to exercise their right under the Code of Conduct to address a Planning Committee on a matter in which they had a prejudicial interest.

The Committee considered possible revised wording for the Protocol providing for Councillors to be called in alphabetical order by surname with each member leaving the meeting on completion of their statement.  Some members suggested that the order of speaking should be at the Chairman’s discretion.  The Committee agreed that such members should only be present in the meeting whilst making their representations otherwise those following the first speaker would have an advantage having heard earlier representations.

At this point in the meeting Councillor Mrs Cooper sought to speak as a non member of the Committee.  The Chairman, having regard to the length of the agenda and the likelihood of all councillors being able to make further representations on the review of the Planning Protocol as it appeared it would not be completed at this meeting, advised that she was restricting the discussion to members of the Committee only.

(d)       Training Requirements

In response to the consultation one firm of chartered town planners and design consultants had expressed the view that some members appeared not to have the basic knowledge of planning law to be able to determine applications on planning grounds.  The Committee considered the poor level of attendance of both District and Town and Parish Town Councillors at Planning training courses and steps which could be taken to improve the situation.  Members suggested that training sessions should be carried out immediately before or immediately after meetings of the District Council’s Area Plans Sub-Committees and the District Development Control Committee as this would achieve better attendance.  Reference was also made to the ability of members to gain knowledge from the Planning Portal.

(e)       Section 106 Agreements

The Committee was advised that a District Councillor had drawn attention to the lack of any reference to Section 106 Agreements in the Planning Protocol.

The Deputy Monitoring Officer reported on possible wording suggesting that care should be exercised about the way in which members discussed the question of providing ancillary community benefits through Section 106 Agreements.  The Committee agreed that an appropriate paragraph should be included within the Planning Protocol.

(f)        Local Government Association Advice – Probity in Planning

The Deputy Monitoring Officer drew attention to the LGA publication and suggested that the Planning Protocol would benefit from incorporating advice from this document including clarification of predetermination, predisposition or bias; action to be taken by Cabinet Members; pre-application discussions; public speaking; and Planning Officers’ advice.  He also advised that he proposed to speak to the Director of Planning and Economic Development about the Codes of Professional Conduct for Planning Officers which was mentioned in the LGA Publication.

(g)       Loughton Town Council

The Deputy Monitoring Officer reported that Loughton Town Council had suggested that the review of the Planning Protocol should be finalised after the new Code of Conduct had come into force. 

(h)       Planning Services Scrutiny Panel

The Deputy Monitoring Officer drew attention to issues raised by the Scrutiny Panel which would also need to be taken into account in the current review.

            RESOLVED:

            (1)        That the officers revise the Planning Protocol in the light of the issues raised in the consultation exercise, the discussions at this meeting and the issues raised by the Scrutiny Panel;

            (2)        That a draft of the revised Protocol be circulated to members of the Committee, District Councillors and Parish/Town Councils for comment in advance of being submitted to a future meeting for consideration;

            (3)        That the revised Planning Protocol be finalised after the new Code of Conduct has come into force.