Agenda item

To receive questions from members of the public, of which prior notification in writing has been received (no later than noon on the Tuesday prior to the day of the meeting).

In accordance with Procedure Rule 1(3)(e) and the Council’s Public Question Time and Participation at Council and Committee Meetings Scheme, the Leader of the Council referred to a question from Mr Scott Lyle and four questions from Ms Judy Lea for the Maldon Society of which prior notification had been given.  A copy of the questions and prepared responses from the Leader of the Council were circulated to all Members and those in attendance at the meeting.

From Mr Scott Lyle:

Question:

“What are Maldon District council going to do about the growing friction caused between 13+ complainants about the peafowl and the democratic majority of the village who wish to retain the peafowl?”

Response:

For the benefit of those that do not know about the issue referred to, which is within Mayland, for background fourteen residents in the Mayland area have complained that they are suffering a continuing nuisance caused by a number of peafowl being allowed to roam free onto their privately owned land.  The Council, as the local authority, has an obligation to investigate when it is in receipt of such complaints. Evidence obtained to date would suggest that these peafowl are having a detrimental effect, of a persistent or continuing nature, on the quality of life of those in the locality.

The one identified owner so far, who owns only some of the peafowl, has been served with a Warning Notice under the provisions of the Anti-social Crime and Policing Act 2014, requiring them to retain the birds within their own land.  Since serving the Warning Notice it has come to the Council’s attention that some of the peafowl may belong to other people, which has led to the siting of the Public Notices in the location.

In answer to the question raised, in respect of poor relationships between the residents within the village of Mayland, whilst the Council is very concerned to hear of this any friction between residents is a civil issue to which the Council are unable to become involved.  Any concerns may be better raised with the Parish Council, as a civil local authority, or with the owners of the peafowl themselves directly.

Whilst the Council can empathise with all parties concerned it has a statutory function to fulfil.

From Ms Judy Lea:

Questions:

“Maldon District Council decision on application 16/00862 from Essex County Council on nuclear waste imports to Bradwell from Sizewell and Dungeness

Even though Bradwell and some other power stations are now reaching the end of their life there is still no national long term safe repository for the radioactive waste they leave behind, despite many promises over recent decades.

There was a prudent stipulation on the original Bradwell planning approval to ensure that the waste stored there would only be that which had been produced there.  The recent application to receive radioactive waste from other stations breaches that principle, which is still one important to members of the public and some at least of the elected members here. 

Can this Council therefore please explain

1          why the response to the County Council was that it had ‘no objection’ to this application, as officially quoted in the Week 34 list of decisions taken by the council on planning issues?  Did no one recognise the principles and implications involved apart from the technicalities?  This despite the issue being hotly debated in the official Local Community Liaison Council attended by MDC members as recently as June?

2          why that application was circulated to interested members of the public such as myself on the Week 30 applications list as ‘for information only’ with no invitation to comment? - a form of gagging if you will as it is the Maldon District residents who will have to live with it.

3          why despite all its efforts to promote tourism and local businesses the Council cannot see the conflict of interest in condoning the turning of the Dengie peninsula into what will be a perceived as a nuclear dump? - or for that matter also currently actively abetting proposals for a whole new larger station which will most likely not deliver on the false promise of supposedly local employment without enormous damage to the local area and beyond, and also be expensive outdated technology when it is up and running?

and finally

4          in the light of this, what reassurances can the Council give that if in the Autumn Theresa May does not ban the proposed new Chinese station at Bradwell outright, the principles of whether it should be built here at all will be fully debated with the District’s residents and elected members before decisions are taken, and as part of that debate ensure full information on the impacts of its construction and use are made widely and effectively public?”

Response:

Question 1 - The Leader of the Council has sought clarification on this matter in order to respond.  Having not been entirely satisfied with the response she is now seeking further information and will respond directly to Ms Lea with a copy circulated to Members.

Questions 2 and 3 - Maldon District Council is not the decision maker on such applications as this is Essex County Council.  In these instances Maldon District Council is a consultee the same as a neighbour or any other interested party.  Any interested party is able to respond directly to Essex County Council with their comments and opinions.

Question 4 - A planning application will be determined by the Infrastructure Planning Unit, currently forming part of the Planning Inspectorate.  A member of the public can register as an 'Interested Party' on any application dealt with by the Infrastructure Planning Unit.  The application will be ‘examined’ by the Infrastructure Planning Unit.  The main method of examining an application is by written representations, but issue specific hearings may be held if the Examining Authority considers it necessary having taken into account representations made by interested parties at the preliminary meeting.  If any interested party asks for an open floor hearing then one must be held by the Examining Authority.  All hearings are held in public and anyone can attend.