Crawley councillor’s ‘gain votes’ claim sparks heated planning row
Heated words were exchanged in a Crawley planning meeting after one councillor accused others of trying to ‘gain votes’ as they debated an application.
The meeting on Thursday, October 22, was called to decide whether to allow a faith school to be built next to a mosque in Broadfield. Officers were firm in their belief that permission should not be given but Labour councillors seemed convinced that it should be allowed.
It was a similar story in June, when the matter was deferred to allow officers time to test any reasons for approval – but their recommendation stayed the same.
When called on to speak, James Tidy (Ref, Pound Hill North & Forge Wood) said: “First of all I would like to speak on behalf of residents who have repeatedly said they feel like, frankly, Labour members of this committee are using this to gain votes and not for the interests of people in Crawley.”
His comment prompted uproar among Labour councillors. Planning meetings are non-political, with committee members expected to decide the applications according to national regulations, not the personal feelings of themselves or others.
Julian Charatan (Lab, Ifield) said: “That was an extremely political comment. It was a political statement in a non-political body based on no evidence at all. It’s based on hearsay.
“I’m going to take it further. I’m going to take it up to [chief executive officer] Ian Duke because this is not acceptable in a non-political body.”
Olu Adeniyi (Lab, Tilgate) added: “We need to caution our members if they don’t know what to say or what to do because this is a non-political committee and we should avoid making political statements. If Cllr Tidy is not aware of this he should be taught.”
When asked after the meeting about his declaration, Mr Charatan said: “I will take whatever action is appropriate and proportional.”
Mr Tidy said: “It is extremely important to me that residents’ concerns are heard, even if some councillors do not like it.”
Pointing out that Ian Irvine (Lab, Broadfield) had also commented on the situation, Mr Tidy added: “It is5 clear to everyone watching that Labour had already made the meeting political.”
Mr Irvine, who is not a member of the planning committee, spoke as ward councillor for Broadfield. Sharing his objections to the application, he said it was ‘the wrong place’ for a school, as the site was too small.
Declaring that he had never known an instance when so many councillors had been willing to go against the ‘solid body of officer recommendations’, he added: “I’m sorry to say, if this planning application is approved, it’s not for planning reasons.”
While the committee voted to approve the plans, the monitoring officer raised ‘significant concerns’ that the decision was ‘unlawful’. She forbade the publishing of the notice of permission until she had investigated the matter.
Mr Tidy said he was not concerned about being reported to the CEO, adding: “My goal is to represent the residents and that will always be my priority. My priority will never be to restrict what I say to ensure that I am saying things that Labour councillors like.”