Agenda item

To consider the attached report.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 2.1(xiv) and section 100B of the Local Government Act 1972, the Chairman has deemed this matter urgent business  in order to meet the timescale for responding to the consultation exercise.

Mover:  Councillor Philip (Planning and Technology Portfolio Holder - at the request of the Panel)

Councillor Philip submitted a report of the Panel proposing responses to questions posed in a Department for Communities and Local Government Consultation Paper on Planning for Traveller Sites.

By leave of the Council, Councillor Philip added the following further recommendations to the report of the Panel:

“(2)      That a meeting be requested with the Minister to discuss the experience of the previous consultation in connection with the Direction, with the intention of modifying the content of the final version of the Planning Policy Statement;  and

(3)        That local Members of Parliament be advised of the report and the request to meet the Minister”.

Councillor Philip emphasised that this was a central government consultation exercise and not one initiated by the District Council.

During the discussion, members suggested a number of alterations to the responses to the consultation including the following:

(a)        expansion of the answer to question 3 to include the words “There is a considerable contrast between the historic seasonal agricultural work patterns of Gypsy Roma Traveller and the work patterns that exist now.  The Council has seen, on average, 12 pitches provided per year over the past three years, but that rate of provision is high compared to what would normally occur”;

(b)        the reference in the answer to question 6 in the sixth line to “Section 11.23a” to read “Policy H, paragraph 23a”;

(c)        the answer to the first question of Option 3 of the Impact Assessment to start with the words “yes – there will be extra costs”, and not “no – there will be extra costs”;

(d)        the response to question 4, to include reference to the fact that artificial numbers can cause problems and existing sites recently receiving planning permission may suffer from such an approach;

(e)        the response to question 8, to express disagreement with the suggestion that the new emphasis on consultation will improve relations between the settled and traveller communities or indeed between different sections of the traveller community;  and reference to be made in that answer questioning the role of Local Community Plans;

(f)         the response to question 12, to include a comment that the use of a rural exception site policy is not considered to be an acceptable approach in the Green Belt given that traveller sites are “inappropriate development”.

In addition, it was suggested that as certain matters of concern to the Council could not be expressed in response to the set questions they be set out in the letter to the Minister seeking a meeting and that a copy of that letter be also appended to the response to the consultation exercise.

Further to the above matters, the Council considered the following motion:

Motion moved by Councillor Wagland and seconded by Councillor Mohindra

“That the following be added to the response to question (3) under the Impact Assessment heading:

“That the suspicions and misunderstandings arise from actual or perceived planning policies not being applied in an even way between the settled and traveller communities”.

Carried

Report as amended ADOPTED

            RESOLVED:

            (1)        That the final wording of the responses to the consultation be agreed by the Planning and Economic Development Portfolio Holder, the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and officers, taking account of the matters raised during the discussion on this matter;

            (2)        That a meeting be requested with the Minister to discuss the  experience of the previous consultation in connection with the Direction, with the intention of modifying the content of the final version of the Planning Policy Statement; 

(3)               That the letter seeking a meeting with the Minister include matters of concern to the Council not covered by the questions posed in the consultation exercise, including clarification about how the Government’s proposals for Localism will fit with the Planning Policy Statement and that the Planning and Economic Development Portfolio Holder, the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and officers be authorised to agree the wording of that letter; 

(4)               That a copy of the letter to the Minister also be appended to the response to the consultation exercise; and

            (5) That local Members of Parliament be advised of the report and the request to meet the Minister.