Agenda item

The Monitoring Officer presented his report under Section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1998 relating to item (iv) on the agenda.

The Monitoring Officer presented his report under Section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1998 relating to item (iv) on the agenda.

Members of Council were  asked to consider the  Monitoring Officer’s report in relation to the Motion on Notice received on Friday 21 November 2014 which was  Item 4 (iv) on the agenda  and part of which was  as follows:

“ 1. Ryedale District Council completely opposes all Fracking in Ryedale”

Council was advised that the contents of the  report should not be interpreted as favouring any side in the fracking debate. The central focus of the report was  on the legal constraints that the Council must comply with in its decision making process.

The Monitoring Officer advised Members of Council that  the proposed motion would be unlawful for the following  two reasons:

1. It commits the Council to a rigid policy in areas where the Council is required to take into account a number of factors, of which policy may be

one but cannot dictate the result to the exclusion of all other factors, before coming to a decision. Most notable is that of planning both in its role as statutory consultee on County and Park applications for minerals and waste, and as local planning authority where it has to determine applications itself. In all such cases, it must take its decision having had regard to all material considerations, and cannot decide them simply on the basis of policy.

b. It is so absolute that it unreasonably fetters the Council's discretion when it comes to deal with any matter related to fracking.

The Monitoring Officer also advised Members of Council that in his professional opinion  the adoption of an unlawful blanket  policy   in relation to fracking had potentially serious legal implications  for both the District Council and Members of the District Council  personally which were set out in the report .

The Monitoring Officer further advised Members of Council that  they had a statutory duty under section 5 (5) of the  Local Government and Housing Act 1989 to consider the contents of the report before  voting on Councillor Clark’s motion.

Councillor Mrs Cowling moved and Councillor Arnold seconded the following motion:

“That Council receives the Monitoring Officer’s report and notes the recommendations”

Councillor Clark moved and Councillor Woodward seconded the following amendment:

“That Council receives the Monitoring Officer’s report and notes the recommendations and refers the report back to the Monitoring Officer to consider amendment/deletion to those parts of his report that do not comply with the business of tonights meeting”

On being put to the vote, this amendment was lost.

Recorded Vote

For

Councillors Joy Andrews, Paul Andrews, Mrs Burr, Clark, Collinson, Mrs Keal, Richardson, Walker, Ward, Woodward.

Against

Councillors Acomb, Arnold, Bailey, Mrs Cowling, Cussons, Mrs Frank, Mrs Goodrick, Hawkins, Hicks, Hope, Ives, Maud, Mrs Sanderson, Wainwright, Windress.

Abstentions

Councillors Mrs Hopkinson, Mrs Shields.

Upon being put to the vote the recommended resolution in relation to the Monitoring Officer’s Report was then carried.

Recorded Vote

For

Councillors Acomb, Arnold, Bailey, Mrs Cowling, Cussons, Mrs Frank, Mrs Goodrick, Hawkins, Hicks, Hope, Ives, Maud, Mrs Sanderson, Mrs Shields, Wainwright, Windress.

Against

Councillors Joy Andrews, Paul Andrews, Mrs Burr, Clark, Collinson, Mrs Keal, Richardson, Walker, Ward, Woodward

Abstentions

Councillor Mrs Hopkinson

Resolved     

That Council receives the Monitoring Officer’s report and notes the recommendations