It can bully its planning committee, but Stockton Council can't bully me

On 11:19 on Christmas Eve I received an e-mail (below) from Stockton Council's legal services department notifying me that they were investigating a complaint that I had breached the Members Code of Conduct by highlighting the council's attempts to bully and manipulate those councillors who sit on its planning committee (see my blog post here).

Back in June, Stockton Council's planning committee voted overwhelmingly, and somewhat surprisingly, to reject a controversial application to build 159 properties on land at Urlay Nook, Eaglescliffe.

As is now par for the course, the developer lodged an appeal whilst simultaneously submitting another planning application which was virtually identical to their previous failed bid.

The week before the committee was due to hear the second planning application, back in November, officers at Stockton Council circulated a legal brief to members of the planning committee which advised if councillors were to approve the revised application it "would probably result in the withdrawal of the appeal". Not only that, it claimed it would make "good sense" to approve the application in order to "extricate the council from the very difficult position it now faces". (read the report in the Evening Gazette here).

Now, there are only two possible reasons for council officers circulating the legal opinion it its entirety as they did - a move they concede was "unusual" and which they admit they couldn't give another single example of when they had done likewise. It was either a display of quite breath-taking incompetence, or a deliberate attempt to manipulate the result of the forthcoming vote.

I had no hesitation in publishing the legal brief in its entirety, and would do so again without a moment's thought.  Too many council officers seem to have forgotten that the only reason they have a job at all is to serve the residents of the borough. To my mind, such a job description does not include trying to rig votes in favour of wealthy landowners and developers contrary to the wishes of residents.

But what irked me the most about the letter I received last month regarding the investigation was not its content - which hardly came as a surprise - it was the timing.

Nearly 7 weeks had elapsed since I published the brief without a single word from the council that any investigation would take place, or was even being considered. Then, on Christmas Eve of all days, and at the instigation of David Bond, the council's Director of Law and Democracy, the letter was e-mailed to me.

Not only that, when I replied to the e-mail just 10 minutes later, both David Bond and Jonathan Nertney - the principal solicitor who signed the letter - were both out of the office until the new year, at least according to the automated messages I received back.

Now, I suppose it's possible sending me the letter by e-mail was Jonathan's last act of the day before, very quickly, setting his out-of-office and skipping out of the office? Or perhaps he and/or David Bond are so utterly spiteful that they thought it a good idea to delay sending it until Christmas Eve, irrespective of the fact they weren't even working that day? Who knows? It doesn't matter.

Stockton Council might have been successful in its bullying of the planning committee - the revised application being approved in November as officers wished (see here) - but they are making an huge mistake if they think they can bully me in the same way.

I will always stand up for residents, acting in their best interests, saying what they want me to say and doing what they want me to do. If Stockton Council have a problem with that, then they will just have to find a way to learn to live with their disappointment.

How Stockton Council is trying to manipulate its own planning committee

Yesterday evening, I was passed some papers evidencing how officers at Stockton Council are shamelessly attempting to influence the way elected councillors vote at next week's planning committee.

In June this year, Taylor Wimpey had an application to build 159 homes on Urlay Nook Road, Eaglescliffe overwhelmingly rejected by the council's planning committee, by some 9 votes to 2, contrary to the recommendation of council planning officers.

Predictably, Taylor Wimpey submitted an appeal against the decision (as reported in the Northern Echo here). In addition, Taylor Wimpey simultaneously submitted a near identical planning application for the same site, which is due to be determined by the planning committee next week.

The application is once again recommended for approval by council officers (you can find their report here). But officers couldn't leave it at that and run the risk of councillors again heeding residents' concerns and refusing the application for a second time; they decided to try and stack the deck in the developer's favour.

This week, council officers circulated to members of the planning committee a legal brief ostensibly relating to the appeal on Urlay Nook (which isn't due to be heard for some months yet). This document in essence states the council has no realistic prospect of winning the appeal and suggests the planning committee can "extricate the council from the very difficult situation it now faces" by approving the application at next week's committee meeting.

Not only that, the brief was circulated to members with a covering note saying that councillors are not allowed to discuss this matter with anybody outside of the planning committee and warned them (threatened them?) that to do so would be a breach of the Members Code of Conduct. Furthermore, members were told they are not even able to refer to the legal brief in next week's committee meeting; any discussion would need to take place in camera (i.e. in secret).

Well, so what?

The only possible explanation for this brief having been circulated to members prior to the planning committee meeting next week is that it is a deliberate and downright grubby attempt to unduly influence your elected representatives, to cajole them to approve the planning application contrary to common sense and the wishes of residents.

To my mind the public have an absolute right to know about such underhand manipulation of the planning committee, whatever hollow protests the council may come out with over the coming days. If I am subsequently found to have breached the code of conduct by putting this into the public domain then fine; a slap on the wrists is a price worth paying every single time to shine a little light on the way Stockton Council goes about its business.

The papers circulated to members of the planning committee can be found below. Share them with your friends, your neighbours, your family and help the truth to get out.