This council notes the lack of planning enforcement actually taken in the last 2 years and raises its concerns. We as a council wish to make clear that we will take enforcement action when breaches are made. We will instruct officers that it is this council’s view that enforcement should be taken unless good grounds not to as opposed to the apparent current reverse ethos.
Decision:
Council Rejected this Motion.
Minutes:
This council notes the lack of planning enforcement actually taken in the last 2 years and raises its concerns. We as a council wish to make clear that we will take enforcement action when breaches are made. We will instruct officers that it is this council’s view that enforcement should be taken unless good grounds not to as opposed to the apparent current reverse ethos.
Councillor Tom Bygott asserted that planning enforcement was an essential part of the planning service and it was important that the Council takes swift action to rectify any breaches in order to ensure that planning law was followed. He implied that this was not happening and that breaches of planning law were not being properly investigated.
Councillor Henry Batchelor opposed the motion as each case of planning enforcement needed to be judged on its merits and any action needed to be justifiable and enforceable. He informed Council that the compliance team would be fully staffed in January and so would have the capacity to respond to the demand on the service.
Councillor Sue Ellington stated that it was important that the Council enforced its planning decisions. She expressed concern regarding the increase in fly tipping.
Councillor Jose Hales suggested that those supporting the motion were being critical of officers, who worked evenings and weekends and he wanted to thank them for their hard work and commitment. Councillor Heather Williams assured Council that officers were not being criticised and that councillors were responsible for giving direction to the planning team and ensuring that they had the resources to carry this out. The purpose of the motion was to highlight that currently there were too many cases to enforce.
Councillor Stephen Drew stated that he would be voting against the motion, which he saw as unnecessary. He added that officers had ensured compliance with planning law in his ward.
Councillor Dr Martin Cahn explained that planning enforcement was a complex issue and the officers responsible for this work needed to be supported. The Council had found it difficult to recruit staff to the planning service, which had put pressure on existing staff. Councillor Daniel Lentell praised Councillor Dr Martin Cahn for his comment, but lamented the political nature of the debate and suggested that those opposed to the motion should have proposed an amendment.
Councillor Dr Richard Williams spoke in support of the motion. He asserted that the compliance team were under resourced and it was possible to be critical of the Council without being critical of officers.
Councillor Tom Bygott stated that if the Council left a problem unaddressed it would get worse. He explained that councillors were responsible for setting the policy of the authority and this could be done without criticising officers. He hoped that the budget agreed in February would provide adequate resources to planning enforcement.
Councillor Tom Bygott proposed and Councillor Dr Richard Williams seconded the motion. A vote was taken and were cast as follows:
In favour (8):
Councillors Tom Bygott, Graham Cone, Sue Ellington, Mark Howell, Daniel Lentell, Bunty Waters, Dr Richard Williams and Heather Williams.
Against (27):
Councillors Henry Batchelor, John Batchelor, Paul Bearpark, Anna Bradnam, Ariel Cahn, Dr Martin Cahn, Stephen Drew, Libby Earle, Peter Fane, Corinne Garvie, Jose Hales, Bill Handley, Sally Ann Hart, Geoff Harvey, Dr James Hobro, Carla Hofman, Helene Leeming, Dr John Loveluck, Peter McDonald, Brian Milnes, Dr Lisa Redrup, Judith Rippeth, Peter Sandford, Bridget Smith, Dr Aidan Van de Weyer, Natalie Warren-Green and John Williams
Abstain (0)
Council rejected this Motion.