THERE is “no direct evidence” of inappropriate activity at Bolton Council’s planning committee, an independent inquiry has found.

A highly-anticipated report into the council’s planning practices says there is no proof of block voting or predetermination by political groups, after a review conducted by the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) in October.

However, the review has recommended a overhaul of the committee to improve engagement with the public — with suggestions such as recording the individual votes of members and making them publicly available.

Councillors first agreed to hold an inquiry following a motion from Conservative councillor Norman Critchley in December, 2015, in which he raised concerns over the public perception of the decision-making process.

The inquiry team found that the committee had “lost” focus on how the public views and engages with it. It recommends that the number of committee members is reduced from 20 to 12, or 15 at most, and that only the most strategically important applications should be dealt with by councillors.

The PAS has also recommended changing the layout of meetings when they return to the refurbished council chamber and livestream them on the council website.

CONTINUEDn2

The report, which also suggests increasing the time limit for public speaking, adds: “The aim of the planning committee must be for the public that engage in this complex and often controversial process to be satisfied with and clear about the decision making process, if not always the outcome.”

The recommendations will now be considered by councillors before they decide what changes to implement.

A council spokesman said: “While there was no evidence of pre-determination or block voting, the reviewers have made a number of recommendations, which they believe will improve the way committee meetings are carried out.

“These recommendations are now the subject of discussion with councillors and once agreement has been reached on what changes to implement, a report will go to the Executive Member, Cllr Ebrahim Adia, for approval.

“The review was undertaken by a team of officers and councillors from other local authorities, who gathered and reviewed information from council officers, councillors and members of the public.

“The full report is available at: http://www.bolton.gov.uk/website/Pages/Planning.aspx”

Labour councillor Nick Peel said: “I would say there is support from all four parties on the obvious things to implement, such as making the committee structure a lot more public-facing so that people can understand what it going on.

“But there is also concern over some of the recommendations which could be considered as weakening the role of the committee.

“For example, reducing the number of members or the number of applications heard. I don’t think the public want the committee to be weakened in any way, they want a greater confidence in how it operates.

“We will look in detail at all of the recommendations in the report and then make our own recommendations.”

Opposition councillors have criticised the review for being a “watered-down” version of what they had hoped for.

Cllr David Greenhalgh, Conservative group leader, said: “I am delighted that the report makes some significant recommendations around transparency and accountability, particularly around the introduction of recorded votes, and while we must all welcome that the panel found no ‘direct’ evidence of block voting, we must also accept the panel acknowledges that under the current council system and process, such evidence was impossible to source or prove.

“I am less happy with the recommendations around reductions in committee members, the applicant having the final word in the debate at committee, and am disappointed that the panel has not recommended that it should be compulsory for committee members to attend site visits.

“Overall I still have regret at how the review was conducted. To examine and comment on a process, and make a decision to not interview any staff other than management, was wrong, and did not adequately represent an accurate picture of the day to day running of the department.

“The report was undertaken because of growing concerns over the public perception of the planning process in Bolton.

“Unfortunately the perception of this planning review is that it failed to dig below the surface and deal with the public’s concerns, and itself will be perceived as being a ‘watered-down version’ of what was originally intended.”

Cllr Roger Hayes, Bolton Lib Dem leader, added: “I think there are some good recommendations and some strange ones that will probably not be feasible.

“Allowing applicants and objectors more time to speak is certainly a good idea and having votes properly recorded would be a very, very good thing.

“I think some councillors and members of the public expected that the inquiry would look more at the allegations made about how decisions were taken, but I don’t think the review team felt it was within their remit because the voting records were not available.”

UKIP leader Sean Hornby said he disagreed with the idea of making the committee smaller, but was pleased that the need for increased training for councillors was raised.

He added: “I’m concerned that the review that was conducted was nothing like what was asked for. It was a watered-down version and I don’t think the public will believe the results.

“This council has got to learn that we need fuller transparency than we have now. Things are not working as they should and the public need to be confident in their council.”

HAVE YOUR SAY: Email letters@theboltonnews.co.uk