Question
The Council has stated that it seeks to protect the integrity of the Green Belt. However, it is clear from the Judgment of HHJ Angela Morris, that has been upheld by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), that the Council has not acted with integrity towards Mr Scott and others. The Council has been adjudged to have acted in a way that was, "unjust and unfair and so offends the court's sense of justice that it must stay the proceedings...to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system (para.93)". It is hard to think of a more serious finding that the Court could have found. Why then, and as reported in the local press, has the Council dismissed out of hand the matter of an internal investigation into the conduct of the relevant Councillors and Officers whose actions gave rise to these findings? I therefore formally request that the Council must reconsider its position - if it is not prepared to do so then please justify fully why it is so dismissive of these findings, as Council Tax payers and people having dealings with the Council, particularly in respect of planning issues, need to be confident that they will be treated in a fair and just way in accordance with the rules of natural justice.
Minutes:
Question
The Council has stated that it seeks to protect the integrity of the Green Belt. However, it is clear from the Judgment of HHJ Angela Morris, that has been upheld by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), that the Council has not acted with integrity towards Mr Scott and others. The Council has been adjudged to have acted in a way that was, "unjust and unfair and so offends the court's sense of justice that it must stay the proceedings...to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system (para.93)". It is hard to think of a more serious finding that the Court could have found. Why then, and as reported in the local press, has the Council dismissed out of hand the matter of an internal investigation into the conduct of the relevant Councillors and Officers whose actions gave rise to these findings? I therefore formally request that the Council must reconsider its position - if it is not prepared to do so then please justify fully why it is so dismissive of these findings, as Council Tax payers and people having dealings with the Council, particularly in respect of planning issues, need to be confident that they will be treated in a fair and just way in accordance with the rules of natural justice.
Answer
Wokingham Borough Council is in no way dismissive of the findings or of residents’ concerns over this issue. When the Leader of the Opposition asked about this at the last Executive meeting on 31 January I expressly stated that he had raised a valid point and suggested we meet the Head of Planning in order to discuss what lessons could be learnt from these events and I am pleased to say that I have had confirmation of a date back from the Leader of the Opposition. In your question you quote two lines of a very lengthy judgement. I will quote one line from the same judgement: “Other judges may have decided this case differently”. Indeed they have done so in several previous cases where the Council has taken similar action against repeated breaches of planning and where the courts have always supported our approach and found in our favour.
I maintain that it is vital that we vigorously protect the Green Belt against unlawful development whilst securing the integrity of the planning process. But am very keen to learn what, if anything, we could have done differently in this case.
However, focussing on court processes misses the point that Wokingham Borough Council has successfully protected the Green Belt from unlawful development and upheld the planning process.
Finally I would remind you that despite the Court of Appeal’s judgement both the High Court injunction and the two year suspended prison sentence remain in force.
Supplementary Question
I am grateful to hear that you are prepared to take this item forward with the Head of Planning and that is to be welcomed. I do, however, take issue with the statement that it might well have been considered differently by other courts. The reason being that in this instance the Council has been woefully found to be short in terms of complying with the requirements of the law of this country and therefore the Court of Appeal had no difficulty in upholding the decision of Her Honour Angela Morris and that is the important issue here. It is reputational for Wokingham Borough Council and I would submit that it would be in your interest, as much as those of myself as a council tax payer and other residents and the business world at large, for this matter to be fully addressed and then a line drawn under it so that people will have confidence going forward that the Council is acting as Caesar’s wife beyond approach. Therefore I would ask you to please reconsider that aspect of your comment?
Supplementary Answer
You may have misunderstood the quote. The quote that “other judges may have decided the case differently” was that pronounced by the Court of Appeal.
Mr Neale clarified that the quote was in the finding of Her Honour Judge Morris but it had been upheld by the Court of Appeal who found nothing wrong with Her Honour’s judgement.
Councillor Weeks responded as follows:
I do not disagree that was what the Court said but just to clarify I have already explained that we are having a meeting with the Leader of the Opposition to review it and I would suggest it would be appropriate that we wait until the outcome of those discussions and any conclusion we come from that to see whether it would be appropriate to take it any further.