East Renfrewshire Council has been accused of making it harder for people
to engage with political decisions that could pose a severe threat to their
communities. The rebuke comes after East Renfrewshire Council rubber
stamped a move to stop publishing on the internet, representations from
people who object to planning applications.
Although the information will still be accessible at the council offices,
it is feared the extra effort required to access documents will place undue
strain on community groups and campaigners. Riachard Doherty, a spokesman
for the Scottish Green Party said “Of course there is a balance to strike
betweeen data protection and transparency but it cannot be acceptable to
require that people have an even greater capacity to research planning
proposals than they already need”.
An Uplawmoor woman who claims she was subjected to malicious abuse because
she objected to a planning application has responded cautiously to the move.
Aileen Jackson set up the Uplawmoor Wind Turbine Protest Group in an
ultimately fruitless bid to thwart the construction of a windfarm adjacent
to the village.
In January 2012 the Barrhead News reported claims that she and others
opposed to the development were targeted by unidentified opponents.
Examples cited at the time included dead rats being left in open view,
broken glass scattered across horses fields and outside taps being turned
on in the middle of the night. There were also claims of horses anti-fly
rugs being cut off and slashed in pieces and cars vandalised.
In the worst case it was alleged a teenager was threated and told to tell
anyone who might consider objecting to a particular scheme they would be
“seriously hurt”.
Although there was never any suggestion that developers were involved,
Aileen says the alleged incidents put off some people from making their
objections public.
Recalling her experiences, she said, “I was urged by my lawyer to make this
information public as he quite rightly said bullies have to be dealt with
and the best way to do that is not to hide but to publicise the facts. It
worked as things calmed down considerably. However, the downside was that
many objectors were too scared to make further representations in case they
received the same treatment as us”.
Referring to the changes which were rubber stamped last week, she added “I
brought this up with Councillors some time ago and suggested all personal
information be removed from representations. However I doubt that had any
influence on ERC’s current proposal as this is really just a time and cost
cutting operation. I sympathise greatly with the Planning Authority as
they are stretched to the limits but I’m not sure if this idea is in the
best interest of the public or the applicant. It will not stop “bullying”
as the representations will still be available for viewing at the Office
with all personal data intact. My suggestion would be to still publish
representations online and allow viewing at the Office with all personal
data removed. This allows the applicant to easily gauge the strength of
opinion, without many time consuming and expensive trips to the Office and
allows them to respond to the concerns raised in objections. There is no
need for the applicant to know the author of the representation as long as
ERC does so they can be confident it is a legitimate
representation. Objectors will feel comfortable knowing their personal
data is not being misused which will give them confidence to express their
opinion and not live in fear of repercussions”.
“I also think it unfair to suggest that people “copy” others’
comments. Planning applications are often accompanied by many, long and
technical documents which most people do not have the time, inclination or
expertise to read and understand. Few take the time to research the
meaning of a “material planning consideration” so to be able to read other
people’s comments saves them time and effort and stops them wasting their
objection by referring to issues which will not be taken into account by
decision makers”.
0 Comments