Fettering discretion in the planning process

EDDC current constitution page 196

Do be aware that you are likely to have fettered your discretion where the Council is the landowner, developer or applicant and you have acted as, or could be perceived as being, a chief advocate for the proposal. (This is more than a matter of membership of both the proposing and planning determination committees, but that through your significant personal involvement in preparing or advocating the proposal you will be, or perceived by the public as being, no longer able to act impartially or to determine the proposal purely on its planning merits.)

and page 197:

Don’t speak and vote on a proposal where you have fettered your discretion. You do not also have to withdraw, but you may prefer to do so for the sake of appearances.

 Do explain that you do not intend to speak and vote because you have or you could reasonably be perceived as having judged (or reserve the right to judge) the matter elsewhere, so that this may be recorded in the minutes.

 Do take the opportunity to exercise your separate speaking rights as a Ward/Local Member where you have represented your views or those of local electors and fettered your discretion, provided you do not have a disclosable pecuniary interest.. Where you do exercise these speaking rights:
– advise the proper officer or Chairman that you wish to speak in this capacity before commencement of the item;
– remove yourself from the Member seating area for the duration of that item; and
– ensure that your actions are recorded.

…..
Be aware that you should not speak or vote on any matter which you have discussed at Cabinet unless you have demonstrated there and can do so at the relevant planning meeting that you have not predetermined the application. …

…Do not take part in any planning meeting on a matter in which you may have been seen as advocating a proposal as a Cabinet Member.

So, we build more homes – who then buys them?

According to a report from the National Housing Federation, only an “exclusive members club” will be able to afford houses:

http://www.housing.org.uk/media/press-releases/homeownership-is-becoming-an-exclusive-members-club/

As for “affordable” homes, they should be no more than 80% of the cost of owning or renting a home on the open market.

If a home costs £200,000 and rents for £800 a nonth that would be £160,000 and £660 a month. But if a home costs £400,000 and rents for £2000 a month then that’s £ £320,000 and £1,600 a month. It is not based on what people can afford, just a simple mathematical formula.

So, why are we building more and more expensive properties in East Devon?

From one of our correspondents: “Greater Exeter”?

Interesting response from Peter Whitfield to the piece on local government reorganisation.

Take a look at the current ‘dispute’ between Hull City Council and East Riding District Council, which is getting quite nasty.

http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Head-Hull-boundary-commission-border/story-22926385-detail/story.html

Hull want to take a chunk of East Riding, and the parallels with Exeter and East Devon are obvious.

The case for Exeter taking control of the growth point area is strong, and we know that Exeter is ambitious for expansion both economically and politically. They wanted to become a unitary council, and also had aspirations to absorb Exmouth. EDDC, in political turmoil, having made a colossal mess of the Local Plan, and now proposing a very unpopular relocation, look like sitting ducks. EDDC is the largest District Council in Devon, and one of the largest by population in the country. Exeter City Council are well regarded, and have the highly rated Karime Hassan ex EDDC) in charge as Chief Executive: the call for devolution following the Scottish referendum will surely be an opportunity to trigger an attempted snatch of territory from EDDC.

The Growth Point is already a joint enterprise between various authorities and is widely perceived as an extension to the economic zone of Exeter. Its political and economic orientation is completely dominated by its proximity to and relationship with the City.

I have often wondered at the way in which East Devon’s boundaries are arranged, with Pinhoe, so obviously part of Exeter, being included, and areas to the north and east of Exeter bizarrely being administered by EDDC.

Of course, once the loss of the Growth Point is conceded, the next issue is where would the new boundaries of the City be set? Presumably, Cranbrook would be included in Greater Exeter.

More weasel words?

A report, by the IPPR North think-tank, calls for a ‘metro mayors’ for city regions, and would give greater powers to vary taxes to local councils.

Eric Pickles said:

“The Coalition government has delivered significant devolution of power and finance to local communities and there is real scope to go further in England.

“However, localism in England should be about devolving power to the lowest appropriate level – down to councils, to neighbourhoods and to individuals. There may be some role for combined authorities on a strategic level to promote economic development and transport, but there is a real risk they will suck power upwards away from local councils and local taxpayers.

“Nor should localism be a fig leaf for hitting hard-working people with a new range of municipal stealth taxes. Creating new taxes, more politicians and new tiers of local administration is not the answer – the starting point should be increasing local democracy and local accountability.”

Er, what about localism not actually working in any way, shape or form – where do we go then?