Thank you, Howard.

  During the examination in public, the Inspector explained that the rules had changed - something he sought clarification on as the debate progressed. Under the old system, the inspector had power to make changes and alterations in response to representations made to him. In the case of the Core Strategy Examination in Public, he said he had no power to make alterations - he could only declare the plan sound or unsound. IN other words, if the plan was sound, the whole plan had to be accepted - there was no half way or compromise position.  

This is something that Carter Jonas understood right from the very beginning. The plan substantially prejudiced their clients' FINANCIAL interests, and so they had no choice but to question the soundness of the whole plan. I followed them and I also asked the inspector to declare the plan unsound, as this was the only way to get the plan changed for my ward and my village.

  My written representations produced at the enquiry are on my website and there is nothing secret about them (SEE NOTE BELOW).   Carter Jonas have planning experts, who know the system far better than I do. Throughout the enquiry, their expert, Kathryn Jukes told me (privately) that the plan was so flawed that she could not see how the inspector could declare it to be sound. She was proved to be right, and it is no good saying the inspector's decision was wrong or misguided, because his reasons are carefully stated in his decision notice which is in the public domain, and if the Council really believed it was so bad, they could have challenged the decision by judicial review.

  I fully agree with the inspector's decision, but I really do wish I had had the expertise to persuade him to do something he would not otherwise have done. I may be a good advocate, but I am certainly not that good! The plan had to be wrong in the first place.

  That was two years ago. Ryedale was not the only authority to have its core policy declared to be unsound. I understand the other authorities have got their act together, and come up with plans which have since been accepted as sound. Ryedale, on the other hand, did a consultation last year in July, but what has happened to that? What progress has been made since?  

What the Council needs to understand is that there are a lot of people who will be very angry if they wake up one morning, and find a plan like the one that went to the inspector two years ago approved. Ryedale needs to listen to the people, particularly to the Town and Parish councils, instead of imposing on them something that many of them will not want, and expecting them to tamely accept it.

  Regards   Paul         -----

Original Message ----- From: Howard Keal Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 8:17 PM Subject: RE: Gazette Headline Story this week

Hi Paul   I have one question.   Is it true that you asked that the inspector find the strategy unsound?

  Kind regards Howard

NOTE REFERRED TO ABOVE

The following documents are recorded under the "News and Views" tab, and state the views of Paul Andrews and Habton PC on the Core Strategy of the LDF. Please click on the list for a direct link to the document, and see if you agree with the views stated:

2006 Response of PA to Council's consultation on draft Core Strategy of LDF

5th July 2006 Written Representations of PA on the Care Strategy for the Examination in Public

20th August 2007 Written Representations of Habton PC on Revised Draft Core Strategy

20th August 2007 Written Representations of PA on the Revised Draft Core Strategy