A Councillor’s decision to abstain from voting on planning applications has re-ignited a row over access to documents held by East Renfrewshire Council.
Tory Cllr Stewart Miller who represents Busby, Clarkston and Eaglesham told the committee he was unable to view representations before the meeting. He went on to say that as far as he was aware the representations could have been submitted by people from Kazakhstan.
His comments follow a recent decision by ERC to stop publishing planning representations on the on line portal, a move that prompted critics to label the authority’s planning system undemocratic.
Members of Neilston and Uplawmoor community councils have also recently raised concerns about accessing planning documents.
Uplawmoor resident, Aileen Jackson who wrote to councillors detailing her own personal concerns about accessing planning documents for windfarm applications in the area, said “Given my experience at the planning office and the concerns which I raised with councillors, the actions of Cllr Stewart Miller are justified. If there was any doubt in his mind that he had not been supplied with all relevant documentation then he was right to abstain.”
The News previously documented Mrs Jackson’s concerns which she says became more pronounced when she attempted to access papers at the planning office. She explained “I supplied the admin assistant with reference numbers for wind turbine applications which I wished to view. There were only three representations contained in the first file, my own was missing as well as others which I knew had been submitted by neighbours. When I queried the missing representations I was told I would have to make an appointment if I wished to view them”. An expert report on windfarm noise, commissioned and paid for by local residents was also missing.
I believe this new policy will hinder constituents becoming involved in the planning process, which as we all know, benefits from public engagement. Transparency is absolutely critical and I was dismayed by my discoveries.
John Scott, Chair of Neilston Community Council said “Public responses are now only viewable by members of the public if they physically visit a council office and ask for print outs. If I didn’t have a car or was infirm or had a full time job I would not be able to view representations. I think that a great percentage of the population is being discriminated against by this decision. It is utterly disgraceful and undemocratic.
Richard Docherty of the Scottish Green Party told this newspaper “Councils have a fundamental duty to their constituents to make planning as participative and transparent a process as possible, yet often it seems to be regarded as a tick box exercise with public opinion something to “get around” rather than take a lead from.”
0 Comments