Suffolk County Council opposition to Government policy plans spirals into heated debate on climate targets

A motion opposing Government policy plans descended into a heated debate on climate targets.

Cllr Richard Rout sought support from other county councillors on Thursday afternoon in opposing Government plans to remove sections 42 and 49 of the Planning Act 2008.

These ensure developers are required to consult on massive energy projects and listen to take into account communities' concerns.

Removing these, he argued, would allow developers to blitz through the process and ignore those affected.

Cllr Rout said: "Let me be very clear, in Ed Miliband's mad dash to decarbonise, the Labour Government is saying developers won't have to consult and, even if they choose to do so, they don't have to listen.

"Never have I felt anyone cared so little about the views of our councils and our residents, and that it's the Government that cares so little is truly chilling."

Cllr Andrew Reid, who spoke on behalf of residents, said his division had been the target of a 'green energy assault on our Suffolk countryside'.

He said: "My residents in Friston and the surrounding parishes have had their patience stretched to the very limit as their quality of life has been eroded by energy project proposal after energy project proposal.

"The strain these projects place upon individuals and communities is very real; the impacts on mental wellbeing are very real."

Although there seemed to be widespread agreement in the opposition for the removal of these sections of the law, a heated debate broke out on the council's position on the Government's 2030 target to decarbonise the energy grid.

Cllr Andrew Stringer, the leader of the Green, Li beral Democrat and Independent Group, said he 'wholeheartedly' supported most of the motion, with a caveat.

He proposed an amendment replacing the motion's opposition to the 2030 target with a call for the Government to get on with the production of a Land Use Framework, which would help decide where major energy projects would go.

Again, although it seemed as though councillors were welcoming of calling on the Government to come up with the framework, a heated debate erupted on targets.

From the proposer's view, opposing the targets would oppose the speed at which projects were being proposed, assessed and delivered.

The motion read: "The council reiterates its opposition to the government’s 2030 grid decarbonisation target, which drives this relentless pace of development, prioritising arbitrary deadlines over thoughtful planning."

The opposition, however, argued targets weren't the cause of the race for renewables, but rather the profits developers would make out of delivering energy projects.

Cllr Sandy Martin, the leader of the Labour Group, accused Conservative councillors of not accepting the gravity of the climate change crisis in opposing the Government's targets.

He said: "We have got to move fast and we have got to go a long way and this Government is taking the whole climate crisis seriously in a way the previous Government never did."

The amendment proposed by Cllr Stringer was defeated with 38 votes against and 16 for.

Following the meeting, the GLI Group said the council had missed an opportunity to push for a strategic plan on major energy projects.

Cllr Rout's motion, on the other hand, was passed with 42 votes in favour, three against and nine abstentions as it had been initially proposed.

This means several councillors from he opposition parties voted to back the council's opposition to removing the two sections from UK law despite their disagreement on the authority's position on Government climate targets.