Minutes:
Before this item was considered, the Assistant Director Corporate Governance provided the following advice relating to the involvement of members of the London Borough of Enfield’s Planning Committee in the debate. Any planning application relating to the Pinkham Way site would be a matter for the London Borough of Haringey’s Planning Committee to determine. Whilst the London Borough of Enfield’s Planning Committee would be invited to submit views on the application, as part of the usual planning process, it was not felt this would create any issues relating to predetermination and therefore preclude its members from participating in the debate on the motion.
Councillor Lavender moved and Councillor Neville seconded the following motion:
“Enfield Council resolves to
(i) object to the identification of Pinkham Way as a suitable site for waste recycling, treatment and related uses in the North London Waste Plan’ and
(ii) call upon Haringey Council to apply rigorously the sequential test advocated in the North London Waste Plan in order to reject any planning application for waste uses on the Pinkham Way site.”
During the debate Councillor Goddard moved and Councillor Bond seconded the following amendment:
“1. Enfield Council recognises:
1.1 The Mayor’s London Plan waste targets for self sufficiency and the Mayors emerging draft replacement London Plan's aspirations for regional self sufficiency for waste management.
1.2 That a decision was taken in 2009 to include Pinkham Way in the NLWP.
1.3 That Councillor Neville, then Enfield Council’s Cabinet member for Environment and the Street Scene chaired the NLWP.
1.4 That a decision was taken by the NLWA to buy Pinkham Way from Barnet Council in 2009.
1.5 That in 2009, when the decision was taken to buy Pinkham Way from Barnet Council, Councillor Lavender, then Deputy Leader of Enfield Council and Vice-chair of NLWA, and Councillor Hurer, then a Cabinet member of Enfield Council, represented Enfield Council on the NLWA.
1.6 That in May 2010, there was a change of administration in Enfield, from Conservative to Labour, and its nominations to the NLWP and the NLWA changed.
2. This Council further recognises that Enfield and its residents have borne the responsibility of managing more than their share of waste arising from the seven authorities that make up the NLWA. Therefore, this Council believes that there should be no increase in the management of waste at the Edmonton Eco-Park or elsewhere in the London borough of Enfield.
3. Therefore, this Council calls upon the Leader of the Council and the Leader of the Opposition to write to the Leader of Barnet Council that Barnet Council should withdraw its proposal to park its refuse vehicles at Pinkham Way.
4. This Council believes that the outline planning application to Haringey Council for Pinkham Way should not be determined before the outcome of the Examination In Public of the NLWP.
5. That the Leader of the Council should write to the Leader of Haringey Council with the full text of this motion.”
Following a lengthy debate Councillor Goddard moved and Councillor Bond seconded that the amended motion be put to the vote. This was agreed with the following result
For: 32
Against; 25
The amendment was then put to the vote and agreed as the substantive motion with the following result.
For: 32
Against: 25
Councillor Bond then moved and Councillor Goddard seconded that the motion, as amended, be put to the vote. This was agreed with the following result:
For: 32
Against: 25
The substantive motion was then put to the vote and agreed with the following result:
For: 32
Against: 25