Agenda and minutes

To receive notice of any Declarations of Interest from Members.

Andy Day advised that Councillors Roger Hunneman, Ieuan Tuck and Emma Webster had given apologies to the meeting as they each had a Personal and Prejudicial Interest in Agenda Item 3.

Councillor Keith Woodhams declared an interest in Agenda Item 3 and reported that, as part of his interest was personal and prejudicial, he would be leaving the meeting during the course of consideration of the matter if a reference was made to Newbury Racecourse.

Councillors Julian Swift-Hook and Billy Drummond declared an interest in Agenda Item 3, but reported that, as their interest was personal and not prejudicial, they determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

(Councillors Roger Hunneman, Ieuan Tuck and Emma Webster had declared that they had a personal and prejudicial interest in this item in advance of the meeting. They therefore did not attend the meeting, did not take part in the debate and did not vote on this item.)

(Councillor Keith Woodhams declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Agenda item 3 by virtue of the fact that his daughter worked for David Wilson Homes (developer of Newbury Racecourse) and he worked for a contractor conducting work at Newbury Racecourse. As part of his interest was personal and prejudicial he advised that he would leave the meeting if Newbury Racecourse was mentioned. He would however participate in the remainder of the debate and would vote on the matter).

(Councillor Julian Swift-Hook declared a personal interest in Agenda item 3 by virtue of the fact that he was a Member of Newbury Town Council and Greenham Parish Council, and he was an active supporter of the Say No to Sandleford campaign. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial he was permitted to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

(Councillor Billy Drummond declared a personal interest in Agenda item 3 by virtue of the fact that he was a Member of Newbury Town Council and he was an active supporter of the Say No to Sandleford campaign. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial he was permitted to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 3) concerning the representations received in response to the Core Strategy consultations undertaken between 4 November 2011 and 16 December 2011; and to determine whether any revisions needed to be made to the Core Strategy in the light of these representations.

Councillor Peter Argyle clarified the rules of debate for this item which had been agreed by the two Group Leaders. Councillor Alan Law, Portfolio Holder for Planning, Transport Policy, Housing, Economic Development, would be permitted to speak for up to ten minutes to present the report and move the recommendations. A seconder would then be sought for the Motion. Councillor Tony Vickers, Shadow Portfolio Holder for Housing, Planning, Big Society, Localism, would then also be permitted to speak for up to ten minutes which would need to include the introduction of any amendment. The two Group Leaders would be permitted to speak for five minutes and all other Members would be permitted to speak for three minutes.

Councillor Law made the following points:

·              Following the unanimous approval of the Core Strategy by Full Council in January 2010 it was submitted and taken to public examination in November 2010. Relatively minor issues were raised at this point and the examination was therefore suspended until June 2011 to allow time to reconsult and then resubmit the Core Strategy.

·              In June 2011 the Core Strategy Inspector, on taking into account the Judicial Review of the Core Strategy produced by Forest Heath District Council in relation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.