STOP Harlow North would not wish to prejudice any potential legal proceeding that might ensue from these revelations. Our comments relate to the facts of the matter.
When Bill Rammell issued his press statement after the Panel report was issued at the end of June 2006 we wrote to him and all the Council group leaders by e-mail on June 30th making it clear that PPS11, the policy governing the preparation of the East of England Plan, prohibited making further representations to the Government until the Proposed Changes were published. The Panel report recommended Harlow North be removed from the Plan.
On June 30th we forwarded to Mr Rammell the specific
advice on making representations that we had received from GO-East on June 29th.
By the end of June, Mr Rammell should have been aware that representations were
prohibited under his Government's policy until the Proposed Changes were
published.
The Proposed Changes were published on 19th December 2006 and are now subject to public consultation.
Late last year, November 13th, through a number of Freedom
of Information requests to GO-East, we were informed that Bill Rammell had met
with Yvette Cooper, Housing Minister, on 13th July 2006 to discuss housing and
infrastructure issues. Yvette Cooper is a member of the Department of
Communities and Local Government under Ruth Kelly , Secretary of State. This
department has responsibility for the regional planning process.
This meeting with Yvette Cooper was approximately two weeks after we had written
to Mr Rammell to warn him about the provisions of PPS11 and after the Panel
report had been issued.
When we became aware of this meeting our campaign wrote to
Mr Rammell on 14th November and asked him to explain the purpose of this meeting
with Yvette Cooper. To date we have received no reply.
At the same time we also wrote to GO-East asking for details of this meeting
under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Before Christmas,
GO-East asked for an extension to further consider our request as the 20 day
limit had expired. The extension ran out last Friday 19th January 2007.
On Tuesday 23d January 2007 GO-East gave us a final
answer. They refused to release full details of the meeting.
GO-East agreed that it would be in the public interest in the factual
information provided for the meeting being released because this would provide
confidence that advice and briefing are given on the basis of the best available
information. However they go on to say that Ministers must be able to engage in
the formulation or development of policy without undue concern that information
about this will be routinely released. GO-East therefore decided that the public
interest arguments favour withholding the submission provided for the meeting.
We related these facts to Mark Prisk, MP, for Hertford and Stortford. Mr Prisk's constituency covers the area that would be affected by the Harlow North development which the Secretary of State is now proposing should be re-instated in the Plan. Mr Prisk has raised the issue in the House at the earliest opportunity, today January 24th 2007.
We have also learnt that Mr Rammell wrote to the East of
England Assembly on 1st September 2006 to ask their advice on making
representations.
This was after his meeting with Yvette Cooper and after we had forwarded to him
the Government's, GO-East's, own advice at the end of June.
EERA at this time was no longer responsible for the preparation of the draft
East of England Plan. Responsibility lay with the Government since EERA had
submitted the draft Plan to the Secretary of State. It is unclear why Mr Rammell
asked EERA for advice at this time.
EERA responded to Mr Rammell on 13th September.
We have obtained copies of the letter from Bill Rammell and the reply directly
from the secretariat at EERA.
However before receiving a reply from EERA, Mr Rammell endorsed a letter from Epping Forest Council to the Government which made specific representations on the Panel report. This letter from Epping Forest Council is dated 7th September.
This would appear to have been contrary to PPS11.
PPS11 clearly states:
"Stage 5 - The Panel Report
2.50 The report of the Panel into the EiP will normally be completed within two
months of the end of the examination, although this will depend on its length
and complexity. The RPB and other interested parties should not make
representations on the report except in the context of the Secretary of State's
proposed changes to the draft revision. To do so would undermine the examination
process and be prejudicial to other participants. The Panel report will be
published as soon as practicable after the Secretary of State receives it and in
advance of the proposed changes."
"If a Government Minister has undermined the examination process and prejudiced other participants this is a serious matter that needs thorough investigation. The planning rules should apply equally to everyone."
Nigel Clark
Secretary STOP Harlow North