Former Minister defends Planning decision in election week

Friday 01 July 2022

The outgoing Environment Minister has defended his decision to refuse two planning appeals last week – arguing that he would have never done so after the election.

An official ministerial decision, published online this week, shows that former Deputy John Young signed the document on 23 June – the day after the election – but the former minister said this wasn’t the case.

Instead, he signed it the day before – while votes for the new Assembly were still being cast. Mr Young said he had no idea why his official decision had been dated 23 June.

"Morally wrong" accusation

Yesterday, Express reported on the concerns of St. Peter Constable Richard Vibert, who said it had been “morally wrong” for the minister to rule on the appeal during the election period.

The appeal related to three applications concerning Home Farm, off Mont de la Hague, near St. George’s School.

An independent planning inspector reviewing the appeals, made by Gerald Le Ruez, had recommended that two of the three applications – relating to the siting of shipping containers and the use of hardstanding to park vehicles – should be approved, but former then-Deputy Young disagreed.

In doing so – and refusing the applications – he agreed with the original decision of officers.

"This was all part of business as usual"

Mr Young defended his actions of last week.

He said: “I dealt with four appeals about high hedges last Tuesday, which involved a public hearing and site visits. 

“The following day, I had these three St. Peter appeals to deal with. This was all part of 'business as usual', which can’t grind to a halt because of the election.

“There is a long history of complaints about delays getting these appeals done; the Planning process has to continue.”

Pictured: Home Farm is off Mont de la Hague above St. Peter's Valley.

Mr Young added: “My powers officially ran out when the new Assembly was sworn in on Monday but there is no way I would have made a decision after the election – not in a million years. 

“That would be absolutely unacceptable. 

“I don’t know why the signature date was 23 June. For some reason, ministerial decisions take time to be published. In my opinion, they should be on the website the day they’re made.

“I made the decision last Wednesday, so on election day but before any results had been announced.”

A "rare" instance of going against the inspector

The former minister said that, of the three appeals he faced last Wednesday, he had upheld one decision of the inspector – relating to construction of an access track – which had been recommended to be approved.

“The other two – which the inspector also recommended should be approved - ran contrary to the advice of the planning officer and the Planning Committee,” said Mr Young.

“It was one of the rare occasions when I made decisions contrary to the advice of the inspector.

“I considered that the loss of agricultural land would set a precedent for similar applications in future which could allow for a change of use from that to industrial.”

"It was in the island's best interests"

He continued: “A clear policy coming out of the Bridging Island Plan was the retention of agricultural land, and I don’t think that had been fully explored by the inspector.

“When it came to making a decision last week, I also concluded that it was in the island’s best interests to end the period of uncertainty, which allows the applicant either to make an appeal in law or resubmit an application.

“It was the last set of decisions I made as a Minister.”