Consultation must be real and meaningful - Gazette leaders column by Cllr Mike Cox

8.34.29am BST (GMT +0100) Wed 21st Jun 2006

Over the last 2 years I chaired a committee looking at allegations of impropriety in Hillingdon's Planning department. It was difficult enough getting all concerned to sit down and investigate the problems let alone issue a report which was accepted by all sides. We managed it and we made a number of recommendations.

The report concluded that there was no "prima facie" evidence to back up the allegations but that there were indeed many serious problems in the planning department prior to 2002 but that with new management, improvements had been made. One of our key conclusions was that the Council needed to improve the way it informs residents and consults with them about local planning developments.

In a recent case in Manor ward, relating to the traffic arrangements for the new school in Ruislip, I was forced to request information under the freedom of information act because when I asked for information it was not forthcoming. I then asked detailed questions about the development but I was given no answers. More importantly, local residents were left badly informed by the Council's unaddressed letter which gave no indication of its plans for the roads near the new school. To make up for this I distributed my own copies of the plans to residents. When I reminded officers of the unanswered questions I was assured consultation was ongoing. However, within a few days of this assurance, the unaltered plans were pushed onto the Planning Committee's agenda under "Urgency" provisions. Despite 2 separate petitions from residents presented on the night, dealing with their real fears for the safety of children under the Council's proposals, the plans were passed unchanged.

This was not consultation as I understand the meaning of the word. Residents were poorly informed by the Council of what was planned, the questions and suggestions of a local councillor were left unanswered and nothing was changed to reflect the fears of local parents. Is the new Conservative Council sacrificing meaningful consultation with residents just to achieve artificial targets for completing planning approvals, when it should be listening to local residents?