The Best way to get things done is by Agreement - 11th June 2008

Councillor Knaggs has been Council Leader for just over a year, and has been the most influential councillor for many years before. So, perhaps, it is appropriate to review his leadership and his methods. I believe his leadership style is divisive. I understand he takes the view that nothing will get done unless some unpopular decisions are taken. So perhaps we ought to examine some of the occasions where Councillor Knaggs has led the Council in controversial situations, and see if more might have been achieved if a less confrontational approach had been taken.

Firstly there is the case of the proposed business park at Eden House Road.  There was a huge public outcry when the details of these proposals became known.  The Council could have deferred the application and tried to sort out the objections in regard to highways and drainage, as well as the objection from Eden Camp. Many (if not all) of these objections could probably have been resolved. Instead, the Ryedale juggernaut was simply driven on, and the residents very real and fully justified fears were ignored, in the confident but mistaken assumption that the outcome was assured. A more sensitive approach might have secured the acceptance of residents, and the scheme might then have gone ahead.

Then there is the Core Strategy. The allocation of land for housing and other development is always a controversial issue. Some villages wanted more houses, in order to maintain their vitality, shops, pubs and other facilities; others wanted no more, and the Market Towns knew they would have to accept many more houses. Malton and Norton were prepared to accept 30%  but not 50% of new houses. In these circumstances, it might have been sensible to revise the development limits of some villages, so as to allow a limited expansion of those that wanted new houses, and to reduce the overall allocation to Malton and Norton. This could have been agreed a year ago, and we might then have had an agreed Core Strategy by now: instead it was turned down by an inspector after objections were received. Unfortunately, the Council is still planning on the assumption that Malton and Norton will have no less than 50% of new houses, and that many villages which want new houses will have none – which will probably result in renewed confrontation.

And car park fees? There was a 14 month fees trial, which ended in September last year. One might have expected that this would not end until it had been evaluated, and that the evaluation would have been given more scrutiny than simply as a single item in a multi-item agenda. Nevertheless, the matter was not reported to committee until 31st January this year, four months after the end of the trial, and it was dealt with in a multi-item committee agenda, even though the report was highly controversial. I have long argued that the report should be scrutinised by the Scrutiny Committee. Councillor Knaggs opposed this, but fortunately, Councillor Mrs. Shields has agreed.

By November last year, we all knew there was a credit crunch and business was in for a tough time. Even so, the Council, led by Councillor Knaggs, put car park charges up well above the level of inflation, and has squandered its savings on the appointment of a whole new tier of expensive senior managers.

Finally, there was the flooding debate, where councillors, led by Councillor Knaggs, voted down a motion opposing the abandonment of flood defences. Passing the motion would have cost the Council nothing, but it would have sent the right message to the Environment Agency.

These are only some examples of matters where I think a more sensitive approach would have achieved far more and far better results for the people and businesses of Ryedale.