District councillors have voted through a reduction on numbers of some groups, including its Planning Committee, in a move branded ‘bonkers’ by one.
South Holland District Council agreed the measures at its most recent meeting.
The numbers on the Planning Committee will be reduced from 16 to 11.
Its Performance Monitoring Panel, Policy Development Panel and Licensing Committee will also be reduced by five or four members to 11.
Because of central government looking at plans for the re-organisation of local government, Coun Chris Brewis called the move ‘bonkers.
“There couldn’t be a worse time to do it,” he said. “Of all the proposals in the past 49 years I’ve had on this council this is one of the most bonkers I’ve ever heard of and there’s barely a justification.”
Coun Bryan Alcock said: “I would particularly oppose it on planning. I understand the government would like us to go to a tick box exercise and flow charts concerning all planning applications.
“We represent all across the district and the people that have applications that need decisions by the committee want the decision to be considered by their peers across the district, not just from a handful of settlements.
“Unless someone can justify them, I can’t vote for the propositions.”
Coun Andrew Tennant asked what might happen if there were apologies for people attending.
“Does it give a good impression if we’ve a quarter full committee considering these decisions? I don’t think so?
“What’s the positive? We can all think of negatives.”
Leader of South Holland District Council, Nick Worth said: “I’ve spoken with Coun Paul Barnes (leader of the South Holland Independents) and our initial view when you turn up it feels like half the council is turning up sometimes.
“It’s probably not the most efficient way of doing things.
“By reducing the numbers it gives flexibility so people who have the skills or are more into scrutiny and planning can concentrate on those and it gives greater flexibility around substitutes.
“It won’t stop ward members from attending planning meetings and putting forward issues.
“It’s just more efficient and more flexible.”
After Coun Brewis asked for a recorded vote, the motion was passed with 20 votes for, 15 against and one abstention.
