Agenda item

The report provides a basis for debate of the motion submitted to the meeting of Full Council on 30 July 2024 in relation to the role and function of LPPC and the arrangement of additional meetings to discuss the scope and content of the Local Plan.

Following consideration, the Committee resolved to;

(5 for, 2 against, 1 abstaining, and the Chair not voting)

(1)      Note the motion, as debated, and take no further action in light of the content of the report. 

The Committee received a report providing a basis for debate of the motion submitted to the meeting of Full Council on 30 July 2024 in relation to the role and function of LPPC and the arrangement of additional meetings to discuss the scope and content of the Local Plan.

The following matters were considered:

a)            Scrutiny. A Member of the Committee expressed their disappointment with the Local Plan process and raised concerns regarding a lack of scrutiny of decisions done by the Licensing and Planning Policy Committee. The Member stated that the Local Plan process has been rushed and not enough has come to LPP Committee to discuss and decide.

b)            Public Engagement. A Member of the Committee raised that the Local Plan process needs more engagement with the public. The Member expressed that the public should be communicated with to explain plans and problems, in order to educate and demonstrate to the public as to why the Council can do some things and why they can’t do others.  The Member expressed disappointment with the lack of engaging the public, given the Local Plan is such an important document and confusing process.

c)            Officer Report. A Member of the Committee expressed sympathy with previous comments and issues raised, but agreed with the Officer recommendation, and information set out in the report, detailing that the Licensing and Planning Policy Committee does not have legal authority to pass the proposed motion. The Member stated that Councillors will have an opportunity to have their say on the Local Plan document when it comes to LPP Committee on the 20 of November. The Member stated that Officers collect evidence, alongside consultants, and write the report and present it, but it is up to Councillors to accept or reject the report and its recommendations.

d)            Party Political Motion. A Member raised that the motion submitted was politically motivated and to be used to campaign against the majority group. Another Member echoed the comments.

e)            Meetings. A Member of the Committee raised that they would be abstaining as they could not support the motion or the Officer recommendation. The Member raised that the motion is too broadly worded and would have worked better if it specified sites and asked for meetings that could go through sites on a site-by-site basis. The Member agreed that more meetings were necessary and expressed frustration that the Local Plan process was not as transparent as it should be. The Member raised that there is nothing else to discuss until the Full Local Plan document is shared and in front of Councillors.

f)             Member Briefing. A Member of the Committee raised that they are sympathetic to comments from the Liberal Democratic and Conservative Members. The Member continued to highlight that there had been multiple Member briefings covering a range of Local Plan topics. The Member pointed out that the Conservative Councillors had not attended all briefings offered.

g)            November LPPC. A Member of the Committee highlighted that the November LPPC meeting is the chance to say what you want about the Local Plan with the evidence base in front of you. The Member explained that Full Council in December, is another opportunity to speak on the Local Plan before a decision is made. The Member echoed comments about there being Local Plan Member briefings– evidence pieces have come to this Cttee and sometimes to full council and have been in the public domain and debated publicly. The council has no control over the local plan process which was set by the Central Government – it is a long and costly process.

h)            Pre-Meeting. Multiple Councillors raised that it would be beneficial to have a pre-meeting on the Local Plan Regulation 19 document, before the 20 November LPP Committee Meeting. A Member of the Committee raised that this is especially important as the LPP Committee Meeting is too close to December Full Council for any real changes to be implemented and made between the Committee Meetings. The Chair responded to inform the Committee that the Local Plan Pause caused issues to the Local Plan process as Officers were not able to work on the Local Plan during the pause, meaning deadlines the Council has to meet to submit on time, under the current arrangements, are very close. The Chair highlighted that the Council would be further along the process had the pause not happened. The Chair informed the Committee that if a pre-meeting is able to happen, it will.

i)             Elmbridge Local Plan.A Member of the Committee highlighted to Members the issues currently being faced by Elmbridge Borough Council, whose Local Plan has failed due to Greenbeltsites being removed. Another Member countered to say that the Elmbridge Local Plan was thrown out by the Inspector, not because they removed Greenbelt sites, but because of the way Officers went about doing it.

j)             Public perception. A Member of the Committee called on fellow Councillors to not feed into the public fear surrounding the Local Plan. The Member wished to reassure residents that Councillors across all political groups wish to protect and save the Greenbelt. The Member stated that Members do not have the evidence base in front of them, and confirmed that once they do, they can respond to it at the November public Committee meeting.  

k)            Summary. The Member who proposed the motion, expressed an apology to residents and stated that they believe the Residents’ Association wants to build on the Greenbelt. The Member stated that their motion was not politically motivated, but they had submitted their motion to aid transparency, not to up-end the Local Plan process. The Member expressed that they are doing their duty to serve their residents and protect the Greenbelt.

Following consideration, the Committee resolved to;

(5 for, 2 against, 1 abstaining, and the Chair not voting)

(1)      Note the motion, as debated, and take no further action in light of the content of the report.