Agenda item

To consider any questions submitted by Members of the Council, in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11 (b).

In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11(b), one question had been submitted by Members by the deadline date for questions set out in the Council’s Constitution regarding:

(A)   Policy regarding the Local Plan

Audio recording – 37 minutes 1 second

In accordance with Standing Order 4.8.11(b), the following question was submitted by Members by the deadline date for questions set out in the Council’s Constitution.

(A)     Policy regarding the Local Plan

Councillor Morgan Derbyshire to Councillor Martin Stears-Handscomb (Leader of the

Council):

"Following the correspondence between members of the administration in the local press, would the Leader of the Council please advise the Council as to what exactly is the coalition’s policy regarding the Local Plan?"

Councillor Martin Stears-Handscomb, Leader of the Council, provided the following response:

“Our two groups do not describe our working relationship as a coalition. We have not coalesced. We remain two separate party groups on the Council. 

What we have is a Joint Administration with an agreed programme, which is outlined in the Council Plan, which I must say has a measure of agreement by all parties on this Council as evidenced by the all member workshop which supported its development.

With regard to the local plan, this was of course put together and submitted for inspection under the previous administration. Successive governments have weakened the planning system and we live with the consequences. The latest white paper potentially damages it even further and we are strongly advised that we need an adopted local plan as at least some form of protection.

Our two groups have a common objective, which is to achieve the adoption of the local plan. It includes policies which among other things will ensure that better environmental standards are applied to all our housing and that a higher percentage of affordable housing can be achieved.

To refer to my letter to the Comet: Both our Groups have a common desire to ensure that only the new building that is necessary to meet housing needs is built in North Herts.

At the same time, we also intend to keep the promise in our joint administration’s Council Plan to enable good quality and affordable housing. Unfortunately, the Comet editor changed the reference to “Council Plan” in my letter at this point to “local plan”, but the import is the same.

Adopting the local plan has been a long drawn out process, which many councillors on the Council now, have had no influence, as the plan was submitted for examination more than three years ago. 

The motion discussed at the last council meeting was moved and seconded by two of those councillors, who put forward one way to achieve our joint objective.

That approach was tested at the recent council meeting and a majority of councillors did not support that approach.

Following that decision, my colleague Cllr Paul Clark, Executive Member for Planning and Transport, taking advice from the all-party Local Plan Project Board, is continuing to respond to the questions from the Inspector to ensure that a plan can be adopted at the earliest opportunity. The Council has already made a commitment to an all-plan review at a very early date following the plan’s adoption. This is consistent with Cllr Clark’s response to the Comet following the extraordinary Council meeting.

I trust that clarifies the administration’s united approach.”

Councillor Morgan Derbyshire asked the following supplementary question:

“Green belt development is a controversial part of this Plan. What is your view and is it aligned with the Portfolio Holder?”

Councillor Martin Stears-Handscomb responded:

“I have been a long standing advocate of the Green Belt and of course the whole issue of planning and green belts etc. Letchworth had a great part in that as did the post war Labour Government.

We need to remember that the Green Belt Policy is not something that is absolutely sacrosanct in terms of the green belt area. It is a policy to ensure that any development that is progressed avoids coalition or coalescence of settlements and ensures that the best possible development is carried out within those areas where we have green belt. We rely on the metropolitan green belt.

That I know is something dear to Councillor Clark as executive Member and Councillor Ian Mantle as Deputy. It is something we are working towards, ensuring that going forward.

We already, earlier this evening, agreed to work with the Growth Board to ensure that going forward we have a much more joined up approach to working and developing going forward.

I know all of us in this Council have the same view that our green belt is very important and maintaining that policy is very important, so I would argue that we have a united view on how we develop and continue that green belt policy going forward.”

Councillor North raised a point of order that in a previous meeting the Deputy Executive Member had been given the opportunity to respond to a question posed to the Executive Member and asked the Chair to give the Deputy Executive Member the opportunity to respond.

Councillor Stears-Handscomb advised that Standing Orders were very clear and that Councillor Clark had been given sight of the response given.

The Chair stated that the Standing Orders would stand.