Agenda item

“This Council is committed to an objective, transparent and democratic process in planning. It must allow residents, councillors and all interested parties sufficient time and ample opportunities to be heard and to fully discuss and understand the implications of the current Stansted Airport planning application for extending its capacity.

The Council requests officers to review as soon as possible the process and timetable and to inform the Council and public of key milestones in the evaluation process that will ensure the above principles are met before the application is submitted to the Planning Committee for determination.”

Councillor Lees proposed the following motion:

 “This Council is committed to an objective, transparent and

democratic process in planning. It must allow residents, councillors

and all interested parties sufficient time and ample opportunities to

be heard and to fully discuss and understand the implications of the

current Stansted Airport planning application for extending its

capacity.

Council notes the four week extension of the timetable for responses to the application and further notes the arrangements for public speaking on the application at afternoon and evening sessions prior to the date arranged for the Planning Committee.

The planning application is the responsibility of the Planning Committee and it is Council's expectation that before the Planning Committee considers the application, all stakeholders, residents and consultees have had a full opportunity to participate and all relevant information will have been received and fully assessed.”

She said that there was a feeling the application was being rushed.  Local residents needed further reassurance that it was not being railroaded.  The vast quantity of paperwork to go through necessitated taking more time to ensure full transparency and due diligence was applied.

Councillor Rolfe questioned the wording read out by Councillor Lees which included some wording from the original motion as well as some wording from the proposed amendment tabled at the meeting, together with some additional words.  He agreed with the sentiments expressed in the motion but said there was already a clear process and full consultation in place.  He proposed an amendment as follows:

Retain the first paragraph.

Add the following words to the end of the second paragraph:

“… which are intended to facilitate further participation of interested parties, and reporting those speakers' statements to the Committee.  Council instructs officers to continue to keep the Council and public updated on progress and the planning process.

Add the word “Determining” to the beginning of the third paragraph.

Delete the following words from the third paragraph:

“… all stakeholders, residents and consultees have had a full opportunity to participate and …”

Councillor Jones seconded the amendment.

Councillor Lees asked that the additional words she had suggested be retained as it would help the public to feel they had an investment in the process.

Councillor Rolfe said this point was already made in the first paragraph.

Councillor Artus indicated that he had intended to second the original motion on the basis of a lack of strategic joined up thinking.  Members were concerned about the lack of a strategic vision in matching transport needs with the Local Plan.

Councillor Artus declared a personal interest as a member of Stansted Airport Advisory Committee and Chairman of Stansted Airport Special Interest Group.

He considered there was a general duty to consider all aspects of the application affecting sustainability to ensure a transparent process.  By deleting paragraph 2 of the motion, the amendment was omitting any reference to key milestones and he would prefer this to be included.

Councillor Gerard asked about the procedure to be adopted by the Planning Committee in considering the application and whether there would be the opportunity for stakeholders, residents and consultees to participate.

In summing up the debate, Councillor Rolfe indicated that he was sympathetic to what had been said but great care should be taken in where Council participation finished and Planning Committee responsibility began.  Any suggestion of prejudice or pre-determination should be avoided.  The Local Plan briefing was not a public session but would be audio recorded.  He intended to ensure that  the consideration of housing provision along the A120 corridor came together with the Stansted Airport expansion proposals to allow an assessment of whether accessibility was sufficient.  All of this had been picked up in the amendment and he would prefer to keep to this wording.

The Chairman put the amendment to the vote and this was carried unanimously.

The substantive motion was then carried unanimously.

RESOLVED to approve the following motion:

This Council is committed to an objective, transparent and

democratic process in planning. It must allow residents, councillors

and all interested parties sufficient time and ample opportunities to

be heard and to fully discuss and understand the implications of the

current Stansted Airport planning application for extending its

capacity.

Council notes the four week extension of the timetable for responses to the application and further notes the arrangements for public speaking on the application at afternoon and evening sessions prior to the date arranged for the Planning Committee, which are intended to facilitate further participation of interested parties, and reporting those speakers' statements to the Committee.  Council instructs officers to continue to keep the Council and public updated on progress and the planning process.

Determining the planning application is the responsibility of the Planning Committee and it is Council's expectation that before the Planning Committee considers the application, all relevant information will have been received and fully assessed.