Agenda item

To consider the following motion submitted by Councillors Caroline Jackson, Dave Brooks and Tim Hamilton-Cox.

“Lancaster City Council notes that on 23 September 2015, this Council voted in favour of a motion that stated:

This council agrees to:

(a)        Oppose fracking in the Lancaster district, or fracking outside our district which could affect residents within our district, and call upon the Government to reconsider its policy of encouraging fracking. (Thereafter giving 3 clear and detailed environmental reasons for this opposition – see original motion);

(b)        Urge the Government to scrap proposals to remove responsibility for determining fracking planning applications from local councils.  (See original motion for more detail).

Additionally, this Council further notes that:

In May this year Ministers outlined a proposal in a Written Ministerial Statement to redefine non-hydraulic fracturing shale gas exploration applications as permitted development and to redefine large scale shale gas production sites as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects, thus removing any local authority control and community involvement in decision-making.

That on 5 July 2018, a report by the cross-party Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee warned the Government against its proposals concluding that Mineral Planning Authorities, i.e. Lancashire County Council, were best placed to understand the local area and how fracking could best take place. And that the above report also said the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects regime was unlikely to speed up the application process for fracking.

Lancaster City Council believes:

·                    It continues to support and promote its September 2015 resolution opposing fracking;

·                    That moving decisions about fracking, which have huge implications for local communities, to a national level contradicts the principles of localism;

·                    That ‘Permitted Development’ was designed for developments with low environmental impacts and is therefore not an appropriate category for drilling with such wide-reaching implications for local communities and climate change;

·                    That bringing fracking applications under the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects regime will be harmful to local communities; and,

·                    That local authorities are best placed to continue to make decisions throughout the planning process for shale gas exploration drilling, appraisal and production.

Lancaster City Council resolves:

1.            To respond to the forthcoming government consultation with these views.

2.            To share this response with Lancashire MPs and relevant government ministers.

3.            To reaffirm its policy commitment to “oppose fracking in the Lancaster district, or fracking outside our district which could affect residents within our district”.

4.            To embed this policy within our Climate Change policy and the Council Plan (see resolution 23 July 2018) and so to communicate this policy to our residents, other local authorities, partner agencies and contractors.”

An officer briefing note is attached.

(Having previously declared an interest in the following item in view of her position as a County Councillor on the Development Control Committee, Councillor Pattison left the Council Chamber at this point.)

The following motion of which notice had been given to the Chief Executive in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 15 was moved by Councillor Caroline Jackson and seconded by Councillor Brookes:-

“Lancaster City Council notes that on 23 September 2015, this Council voted in favour of a motion that stated:

This Council agrees to:

(a)        Oppose fracking in the Lancaster district, or fracking outside our district which could affect residents within our district, and call upon the Government to reconsider its policy of encouraging fracking. (Thereafter giving 3 clear and detailed environmental reasons for this opposition – see original motion);

(b)        Urge the Government to scrap proposals to remove responsibility for determining fracking planning applications from local councils.  (See original motion for more detail).

Additionally, this Council further notes that:

In May this year Ministers outlined a proposal in a Written Ministerial Statement to redefine non-hydraulic fracturing shale gas exploration applications as permitted development and to redefine large scale shale gas production sites as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects, thus removing any local authority control and community involvement in decision-making.

That on 5 July 2018, a report by the cross-party Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee warned the Government against its proposals concluding that Mineral Planning Authorities, i.e. Lancashire County Council, were best placed to understand the local area and how fracking could best take place. And that the above report also said the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects regime was unlikely to speed up the application process for fracking.

Lancaster City Council believes:

·                    It continues to support and promote its September 2015 resolution opposing fracking;

·                    That moving decisions about fracking, which have huge implications for local communities, to a national level contradicts the principles of localism;

·                    That ‘Permitted Development’ was designed for developments with low environmental impacts and is therefore not an appropriate category for drilling with such wide-reaching implications for local communities and climate change;

·                    That bringing fracking applications under the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects regime will be harmful to local communities; and,

·                    That local authorities are best placed to continue to make decisions throughout the planning process for shale gas exploration drilling, appraisal and production.

Lancaster City Council resolves:

1.            To respond to the forthcoming government consultation with these views.

2.            To share this response with Lancashire MPs and relevant government ministers.

3.            To reaffirm its policy commitment to “oppose fracking in the Lancaster district, or fracking outside our district which could affect residents within our district”

4.            A suitable form of wording to amend the Local Plan Policies to the effect that: ‘Any application for fracking should demonstrate a net zero impact on climate change.’ Officers may want to refer to Kirklees Council’s Local Plan which included wording to this effect and has been passed by the Planning Inspectorate.

An officer briefing note was provided with the agenda. It was noted that, in view of the Monitoring Officer’s advice in the briefing note, Councillor Caroline Jackson and her seconder had amended resolution 4 of the motion from the text originally submitted, to the wording above.

Debate followed. The Mayor called for a vote on resolutions 1-3 of the motion, in response to requests to take resolution 4 separately.

Resolutions 1-3 of the motion were clearly carried when put to the vote. Resolution 4 was lost with 11 members voting ‘for’; 31 Members voting ‘against’ and 2 abstentions.

Resolved:-

“Lancaster City Council notes that on 23 September 2015, this Council voted in favour of a motion that stated:

This Council agrees to:

(a)        Oppose fracking in the Lancaster district, or fracking outside our district which could affect residents within our district, and call upon the Government to reconsider its policy of encouraging fracking. (Thereafter giving 3 clear and detailed environmental reasons for this opposition – see original motion);

(b)        Urge the Government to scrap proposals to remove responsibility for determining fracking planning applications from local councils.  (See original motion for more detail).

Additionally, this Council further notes that:

In May this year Ministers outlined a proposal in a Written Ministerial Statement to redefine non-hydraulic fracturing shale gas exploration applications as permitted development and to redefine large scale shale gas production sites as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects, thus removing any local authority control and community involvement in decision-making.

That on 5 July 2018, a report by the cross-party Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee warned the Government against its proposals concluding that Mineral Planning Authorities, i.e. Lancashire County Council, were best placed to understand the local area and how fracking could best take place. And that the above report also said the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects regime was unlikely to speed up the application process for fracking.

Lancaster City Council believes:

·                    It continues to support and promote its September 2015 resolution opposing fracking;

·                    That moving decisions about fracking, which have huge implications for local communities, to a national level contradicts the principles of localism;

·                    That ‘Permitted Development’ was designed for developments with low environmental impacts and is therefore not an appropriate category for drilling with such wide-reaching implications for local communities and climate change;

·                    That bringing fracking applications under the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects regime will be harmful to local communities; and,

·                    That local authorities are best placed to continue to make decisions throughout the planning process for shale gas exploration drilling, appraisal and production.

Lancaster City Council resolves:

1.            To respond to the forthcoming government consultation with these views.

2.            To share this response with Lancashire MPs and relevant government ministers.

3.            To reaffirm its policy commitment to “oppose fracking in the Lancaster district, or fracking outside our district which could affect residents within our district”

(Councillor Pattison returned to the Council Chamber at this point.)