County council pledges to fund extra help for rising tide of domestic abuse victims

North Yorkshire County Council has pledged to fund whatever is needed to help survivors of domestic abuse after it had “failed to spend” almost half a million pounds of government funding.

Opposition councillors called on the Conservative-run council to include the £450,000 of funding in its budget for the coming financial year, saying the cost of living crisis had led to a sharp rise in misogyny in the county and that domestic abuse could not “be put under the table”.

Nevertheless, after a lengthy debate, councillors voted against including the funding for domestic abuse in its budget for the coming year and approved a 4.99% rise in council tax.

The decision will mean average band D residents in North Yorkshire will pay between £2,090 and £2,158 in council tax for the coming year, and more if their parish authority levies a charge.

Labour councillor for Falsgrave and Stepney Liz Colling told a full council meeting that domestic abuse incidents reported to North Yorkshire Police in the county had risen from 7,825 to 8,652 in 2021.

Underlining its widespread impact on communities, she added 25% of domestic abuse victims were male.

Cllr Colling said: 

“I think it is time we invested in this service, we should be doing preventative work, tackling misogyny and gender-based violence in our schools and colleges and additional much-needed facilities.”

Other opposition members called for the money to be secured for a long-term domestic abuse strategy and point out how a domestic abuse refuge in Scarborough had been put on hold due to a rise in building costs.

Read more:

However, executive member for stronger communities, Cllr David Chance, replied £750,000 had been set aside for such services in the coming year, alongside a £100,000 contigency, as those were the sums officers believed would be needed.

Referring to the £450,0000, he said: 

“I can assure you if we need the money, we will use the money. The reason is to stop it being in the bottom line of this budget and in doing so it means we don’t have to use more contigency money.”

The meeting heard several leading Tory councillors underline that helping domestic abuse victims was a priority and that they were awaiting the results of a review into safe accommodation and domestic abuse services that had been commissioned jointly with City of York Council.

The authority’s deputy leader, Cllr Gareth Dadd, said the authority was set to receive £1.3m from government next year, and by removing the £450,000 from its spending plans it would help the council to maintain services to vulnerable people, including those for domestic abuse survivors.

He said one of the reasons the funding had not been spent was because the government had stipulated it must not be used for building-type projects.

Cllr Dadd said: 

“The government are not intending in taking it back. It’s a bit of a nonsense really. We will probably end up, in reality, side-shifting this funding pot into general balances and then taking a decision…”

‘Parents must accept responsibility for feeding their children’, says councillor

Parents must accept some responsibility for feeding their children nutritious meals, a council’s leadership has been told, amid concerns that a lack of nutrition is linked to poor behaviour and a rise in school exclusions.

North Yorkshire County Council’s deputy leader Cllr Gareth Dadd questioned what the authority was doing to promote parent responsibility as the meeting was told the council was working on a number of fronts to teach both pupils and other residents about providing wholesome meals.

At a meeting of North Yorkshire County Council’s executive, Cllr Paul Haslam, who represents Bilton and Nidd Gorge, said:

“I am quite convinced, anecdotally, that food is critical, and often children that are disruptive in class is a result of them not having breakfast.”

In response, executive members highlighted a range of of schemes promoted by the council, including breakfast clubs, school programmes, adult education initiatives and projects run by leisure services.

Cllr Dadd said:

“I hear a lot about breakfast clubs, I hear a lot about nutrition within the state provision in schools and the like. What work are we doing as a directorate to promote parent responsibility in terms of nutrition, in terms of feeding children with a balanced and controlled diet?

“Are we putting a similar amount of effort into that, because it seems to me, if I can make a slightly controversial statement, that the focus is always on the state, the council, everybody else to fulfil that obligation, when actually it’s a two-way street, is it not?”

Director of children’s services Stuart Carlton said he was certain of links between children’s behaviour and attainment at school and their security at home, whether that be food or family stability.

He added children were taught nutritional values at schools and the council oversaw the provision of healthy school meals and provided advice about packed lunches.

Read more:

The concerns follow a group of 150 headteachers last week urging Chancellor Jeremy Hunt to increase school breakfast funding by £18m at next month’s budget, saying pupils are disrupting lessons as hunger was getting worse.

The letter warned how the national school breakfast programme would only be available to a quarter of the 10,000 schools across England that experience high levels of disadvantage.

The warning came as the Local Government Association highlighted how 215,000 eligible children were not receiving free school meals.

A meeting of NYCC’s executive had heard the county had seen almost 2,000 suspensions from schools during this academic year so far, which represented a 29% increase on the previous year.

At the same time, following a drive to promote the take-up of free school meals by the council, the number of pupils receiving food had risen, but so had the number of children who were eligible.

A Department for Education spokesman said its breakfast programme was a lifeline to families.

He added: 

“We know this supports attainment, wellbeing and readiness to learn, which is why we’re investing up to £30m in the programme, to help up to 2,500 schools in the most disadvantaged areas.”

Opposition likens North Yorkshire Tory council’s style to Putin’s regime

The leaders of a council which has remained under Conservative stewardship for decades have dismissed proposed changes to its constitution.

A full meeting of North Yorkshire County Council, which has been run by Tories for all but eight of the last 50 years, saw the authority likened to the Russian parliament under Vladimir Putin as opposition members vented frustration over the level of control Conservatives exert over meetings.

The meeting heard while the Conservatives only attracted 41% of the votes at last May’s elections, the political group held 100% of the posts on its decision-making executive, control of all but one of its watchdog-style scrutiny committees, and was now looking to restrict the time opposition members could ask questions.

A proposal had been put forward to allow more time for questions, with its proponents saying it would allow them to better hold the ruling administration to account.

Leader of the opposition, Councillor Bryn Griffiths, told the meeting proposals for the county council’s successor unitary authority’s constitution contained clauses that would limit the quarterly question time for the authority’s leader to ten minutes and to five minutes to other executive members.

The Liberal Democrat group leader said democracy was effectively being “guillotined”, leaving sufficient time for only two or three questions to be answered, and no time for follow-up questions.

Coun Giffiths said the Tories’ concession to publish councillors’ questions and the council’s answers on its website was welcome, but it was “not an alternative to democratic questioning and scrutiny in the council chamber and in the public forum”.

Green group leader Councillor Andy Brown told the meeting elected members had a right to have their voice heard and that should not come at the gift of the ruling group.

He urged the Conservatives to give opposition members “the chance to ask sensible questions for a reasonable time”.

Coun Brown added:

“I know nobody here wants to establish a Soviet-style parliament, but if you’re not careful this resembles very much the kind of rule that exists in the Russian parliament at the moment to curb debate. If you vote for it all you will be doing is forcing the opposition to work more closely together.”

The meeting also heard opposition calls for more of the council’s scrutiny committees to be lead by councillors who are not in the administration’s party, but Conservatives rejected claims they were “marking their own homework” and argued they had an open transparent system of scrutiny that had worked well for many years.

A move to end notices of motion to full council being referred to the council’s executive without debate was also voted down by Conservatives, who argued the proposal would lead to inordinately long and unfocused meetings.

However, the meeting heard the proposed constitution would give about 90 minutes for councillors’ questions.

The authority’s deputy leader, Councillor Gareth Dadd, said the constitution would be reviewed in a year.

He said rather than having to wait for the quarterly full council meetings to ask questions, the proposed system would enable members to ask questions immediately and get a response from executive members within ten working days.

Coun Dadd said by publishing councillors’ questions and responses to them the unitary authority would operate “a more modern way of doing business”.

Both Coun Dadd and other executive members underlined that the council chamber was about debate and holding the executive to account, rather than raisng very parochial issues, and the constitution aimed to “protect the integrity of the council chamber”.

Trial bus service costs North Yorkshire taxpayers £4 more per journey to subsidise

An “innovative” bus service in North Yorkshire is costing taxpayers about £4 per passenger journey more to subsidise than traditional timetabled buses, it has emerged.

North Yorkshire County Council’s executive member for transport Councillor Keane Duncan said the latest available figures for the authority’s Yorbus demand-responsive pilot scheme, around Ripon and Masham, showed a “financial mismatch”, despite successful efforts to increase patronage.

Ahead of reviewing data from the trial the council believes there are about ten zones across the county where a Yorbus-style service would be viable to operate.

A meeting of NYCC’s executive was told Yorbus journeys were costing between £11 and £13, which compared with £8 to £9 on routes the county council subsidised in the same area.

Despite the figures, Cllr Duncan underlined his intention to continue developing what he described as an “innovative” alternative to fixed bus services, which he said had been welcomed in the trial area.

He said:

“Passenger numbers are up, loyalty is there, people are coming back and using Yorbus time and time again which is a really positive sign for us.

“Conventional timetabled services may have a lower subsidy, but they operate on a fixed timetable. This means they can only benefit those lucky enough to live along a bus route with a bus stop available to them.”

Yorbus has been heralded as the potential solution to the dearth of public transport in rural areas of England’s largest county.

The success of the pilot scheme is being viewed as crucial by campaigners fighting for rural transport services, particularly after the authority’s £116m bid to the Government’s Bus Back Better scheme was last year rejected in its entirety, with Whitehall officials citing a lack of ambition.

Read more:

The meeting this week heard transport user groups had recently highlighted concerns about the lack of transport in rural areas.

The concerns follow the executive last summer approving spending nearly £230,000 of taxpayers’ money on trialling its Yorbus demand-responsive bus service for a further year.

They also come three months after Cllr Duncan warned the county’s bus network was “facing a really grave situation”, partly due to rising costs.

The meeting was told the council had relaxed restrictions on using its on-demand bus service since last summer amid fears restrictions were deterring key potential customers and would make the Yorbus unsustainable.

He said the council had expanded Yorbus’s times of operation, the number of villages to which it travels, and, following numerous complaints, introduced the ability to pre-book journeys.

Cllr Duncan said recent months had seen patronage rise by about 30% on the year before.

However, he said the cost per passenger journey on Yorbus, which has been operating in the Masham, Bedale and Ripon area since July 2021, remained relatively high, even compared with journeys on buses with fixed timetables.

Cllr Duncan said the value to residents of Yorbus was greater than traditional buses as it maximised the number of people who could use it – some 40,000 residents in the pilot zone – and was more flexible.

He said the authority would examine the pilot scheme in the coming months, including how to address the high cost per journey.

Harrogate district councils object to Allerton Park asphalt plant plan

Parish councils near a waste incinerator near Knaresborough have questioned whether a decision over setting up an asphalt manufacturing facility on the site should be taken out of a council’s hands.

The parish councils represent numerous villages surrounding the Allerton Waste Recovery Park off the A1(M).

They claim North Yorkshire County Council lied to them about the impact of the incinerator, and that its councillors had pledged the rural area would not see further industrial-type developments.

The comments follow numerous communities across the county accusing the Conservative-run authority of putting big business interests above those of residents.

They have been lodged in response to Tynedale Roadstone’s application to the county council to create an asphalt manufacturing plant across a 2.1-hectare grass and scrubland site at the waste recovery park.

The site, which is an existing and partially complete and restored landfill, features other uses such as a concrete batching plant and the processing of 320,000 tonnes of waste a year from York and North Yorkshire councils.

The firm said the site had been chosen because plastic from the waste recovery plant would be used in the production of the final asphalt road surfaces product, cutting transportation, while its proximity to the A1(M) meant vehicles could enter and exit the site without having to pass through villages.

Planning documents submitted by the firm said the site is “extremely well screened from view” and locating the plant there would “protect” other employment sites in the area.

Read more:

It said:

“The application proposes a land use that is wholly in-keeping with the nature of this site and complements those existing land uses currently operating on the park.”

However, some residents have said they are as concerned about the impact of the proposed asphalt plant, particularly due to the potential of dust unintentionally spilling from the site, while mixing of hot bitumen could allow the release of a pungent, acrid smell.

‘A one-off isolated proposal’

In objections to the scheme, parish councils said when the incinerator had been approved in 2014 they had been assured by the county council that it was “a one-off isolated industrial proposal” in what was acknowledged as a rural location.

In its response, Arkendale Coneythorpe and Clareton Parish Council has highlighted how councillors went on record to say the incinerator would not be the stimulus for further industrial ribbon development along the A1(M) corridor.

A parish spokesman said: 

“If this development is allowed to proceed what the county council promised these local communities will have been proven to be false and we would be right to feel let down by the democratic process.”

In its objection, Goldsborough and Flaxby Parish Council said as the county council had past and present interests in the site, an independent consultant with no specific interest in the plant should be commissioned to assess its impacts.

The parish council’s objection said it questioned “the legitimacy of this planning application being reviewed and considered by North Yorkshire County Council planning authority”.

The parish council said:

“North Yorkshire County Council officers made a big thing about how little the nearby incinerator would impact visually, with it being located in a quarry.

“Plainly that was a lie or at the very least a highly optimistic assessment. The incinerator can be seen from miles away including the east side of Harrogate and up the Yorkshire Dales.”

In response, Cllr Derek Bastiman, whose executive portfolio includes waste disposal, said:

“The application for the Allerton Waste Recovery Park was thoroughly debated at the time and the planning process was rigorously followed. Full consideration was given to any environmental impact on nearby residents and the surrounding landscape.

“The application now submitted by Tynedale Roadstone is entirely separate and relates to an area of land separate to the AWRP lease area. Like any planning application, it will be considered in accordance with planning policy.”

Opposition North Yorkshire councillors criticise ‘community networks’ plan

The leaders of opposition political groups on North Yorkshire County Council have criticised plans to fill the void left by the abolition of seven district councils by launching 30 unelected and unfunded “community networks”.

A series of concerns have been raised ahead of the council’s executive next Tuesday, which will consider establishing community networks to act as the “engine rooms” for social and economic change.

The leaders of the Liberal Democrat, Labour, Green and Independent groups, which collectively secured 59% of the votes at last May’s election, said both they and some members of the ruling Conservative group, which has a two-seat majority, had significant reservations over the move.

A statement issued by the council on Tuesday, said the networks, which it is hoped will include representatives of organisations, such as parish councils, police and the NHS, were being seen as “a hugely important element of the new North Yorkshire Council”, which will be launched on April 1.

It is hoped the networks will build on existing relationships and partnerships between the public, private and community and voluntary sectors, including the close working arrangements that were developed during the covid pandemic.

Cllr Carl Les, leader of North Yorkshire County Council.

Cllr Carl Les, leader of North Yorkshire County Council.

The statement highlighted how the networks would include councillors and receive support from senior council officers, but would be independent of the new authority and be responsible for driving forward action plans centred on a specific area’s priorities.

County council leader, Cllr Carl Les, said: 

“While North Yorkshire Council will cover the largest geographical area of any local authority in the country, we are committed to being the most local too.

“The community networks will be invaluable to ensuring that the voices of communities across North Yorkshire are heard, and that local needs and priorities can be addressed.”

‘Don’t seem to make much sense’

Labour group leader Cllr Steve Shaw Wright said while the proposed organisations were “a start”, due to their lack of powers the networks would “end up like talking shops where people come and tub thump” and feature parishes with vastly different budgets and priorities.

He said: 

“They don’t seem to make much sense at the moment. My patch is so diverse, trying to get something that works for everybody is going to be difficult.”

Read more:

Cllr Andy Brown, leader of the Green group, said he did not understand how community networks would help and that there was a risk of confusion between the roles of parish and town councils, the county authority’s area constituency committees and the unitary council and mayoral combined authority.

He said: 

“I don’t understand when they were approved or how their geography was determined. My biggest concern is nobody consulted the local councillors about the geography of these networks.

“If you are going to have community networks they have to be communities.”

Independent group leader Cllr Stuart Parsons said the community networks would have “no power to make decisions or determine anything”.

He said: 

“How these organisations are supposed to have any impact is beyond me. 

“For example, if a Community Network was to make a recommendation to increase bus services the unitary council’s executive could just turn round and say it can’t afford it. There’s nothing for these networks to have any bite.”

Cllr Bryn Griffiths, the leader of the Liberal Democrat group, said although it was positive that members of communities would be working together to achieve a common goal, there were issues over the networks’ governance, accountability and how they would be financed.

He said: 

“There is potential for these networks to be hijacked by individuals for their own purposes and the role of elected members could be circumvented. I also have concerns they will go their own way and do their own thing.”

Ex-ombudsman criticises North Yorkshire devolution consultation as biased ‘marketing exercise’

A former local government ombudsman has launched a withering attack on two councils’ consultation over a North Yorkshire devolution deal.

Local government expert Anne Seex raised a litany of questions over the quality and results of the eight-week exercise to assess public support for a mayoral combined authority and government funding deal negotiated by City of York Council and North Yorkshire County Council.

However, a meeting of the county council’s executive heard just a single concern raised about the consultation’s mixed findings – that the deal could lead to an increase in bureaucracy – with numerous members instead expressing their excitement about the potential benefits of devolution.

Ex-ombudsman Mrs Seex told the meeting it was clear that those who took part in the consultation exercise in North Yorkshire had seen “more disadvantages than advantages” to the deal.

While the council has claimed “widespread support” for the devolution deal, Mrs Seex said online responses to the consultation amounted to just 0.3% of the electorate, which she described as a “pitifully small” sample.

She said advice from the Consultation Institute it had employed to help run the consultation that the consultation had been good was “a case of a private company marking its own homework”.

Mrs Seex told the meeting: 

“The exercise that you have undertaken is better described as marketing.

“The information to the public was purely promotional and omitted important contextual information about the scheme, such as the only directly elected position would be the mayor, that York city would have three times the representation of North Yorkshire with two members for 200,000-plus people and North Yorkshire having two members for 600,000-plus people.”

Read more:

She said the powers of elected councillors on the York and North York authorities would be “sucked up” by the mayoral combined authority, rather than being devolved down.

Mrs Seex said the combined authority was set to be allowed to call in planning applications and make decisions against local views, while the funding attached to the deal was £200 million less than the two councils had asked for, and that government funding could not be relied on and could be subject to reviews.

She said: 

“The funding amounts to £222 per person per year while council spending across the North has been reduced by £431 per person per year.”

She added most of the powers being trumpeted as being given to the combined authority were already in the hands of the councils.

Mrs Seex said the consultation results provided no breakdown of how York and North Yorkshire residents had responded and that it was crucial that elected community representatives across the county were aware of how their residents had responded to the exercise.

James Farrar, of the York and North Yorkshire LEP.

James Farrar, of the York and North Yorkshire LEP.

James Farrar, chief officer of North Yorkshire Local Enterprise Partnership, which helped run the consultation, said the structure and content of the consultation had been shared with government officials before being launched and that details of the full devolution deal had been shared with the public.

He said: 

“This was not a consultation on the relative merits of devolution. We were consulting on the scheme. 

“The scheme sets out how the devolution deal will be implemented, it was therefore important we focus on the key elements in the scheme.”

Mr Farrar added the Consultation Institute had been employed due its experience in helping authorities examine support for devolution deals.

He said the ultimate decision over whether the authorities had met legal requirements lay with the councils and it would be for the government to assess the suitability of the consultation.

Cllr Carl Les, leader of the council, said the executive would forego its power to send the results of the consultation to the government for consideration, and instead invite all the authority’s elected members to voice their views at a meeting later this month.

He said he was delighted the authority had reached a position where it could progress towards achieving beneficial devolution deals, such as the one in neighbouring Teesside, and a point where North Yorkshire and York would have a more powerful voice.

‘Widespread’ support for North Yorkshire devolution plans questioned

North Yorkshire County Council has been urged to press on with its devolution plan amid claims it had received widespread public support, despite almost half of respondents to its consultation over the proposed governance change declining to support it.

The council’s Conservative-run executive will next Tuesday be asked to consider pressing ahead with plans to create a devolved government for the county and York, which it claims will bring “a host of benefits”, including new jobs, more affordable housing and measures to tackle climate change.

The council’s leader, Cllr Carl Les, said: 

“To have so many people taking part in the public engagement is very welcome, as it shows the interest that is there on the proposed devolution deal.

“The responses will be carefully considered by the county council before a decision is taken to submit the results of the engagement to the government.”

Ahead of the meeting the authority issued a press release highlighting “widespread support” for its proposals, however a council report to the executive underlines some 46% cent of respondents to the consultation did not support the planned governance arrangements.

Leader of the opposition Independents group on the authority, Cllr Stuart Parsons, said: 

“I find it astounding that the council believes the support for its devolution proposals is widespread. 

“I would have thought if they had got 60 to 70% support they could claim that is widespread, but at the moment it sounds like it is thinly spread.”

An officer’s report to the executive recommends it endorses sending the consultation’s results to ministers to open the way for a combined authority, overseen by an elected mayor, which is scheduled to be established later this year.

Organisations ranging from the Tees Valley Combined Authority, the York to the Yorkshire Food, Farming and Rural Network said they recognised the proposed combined authority was a tried and tested way of building strong local leadership with new powers.

Of the 583 people who provided comments that supported the proposed governance arrangements, numerous people raised concerns over increased bureaucracy.

Read more:

However, others said the proposal would result in an increase in democratic accountability, decentralising decision-making in York and North Yorkshire, enabling councils to “work together as one instead of piecemeal” and magnify the area’s voice on the national stage.

Supporters of the proposed deal said York and North Yorkshire could not compete for government funding with big cities in isolation and the proposed mayoral combined authority would offer both a stronger voice and routes to new and enhanced funding.

Nevertheless, of the 501 people who opposed the proposals, many raised concerns about increased bureaucracy, while others said there were too many politicians in the area without having the expense of a mayor and associated staff.

Opponents of the proposed devolution deal said it would introduce an additional layer of local government almost immediately after combining district, borough and county councils into a singular North Yorkshire Council.

Opponents also said the proposed system would erode democratic accountability, increasing distances between residents and decision-makers, taking power away into the large centres of population.

There were concerns expressed over the proportionality of representation between York and North Yorkshire, with many arguing that it would be fairer for the number of decision-making representatives on the proposed combined authority to be based on the two area’s populations.

North Yorkshire electoral change campaigners accused of wasting council’s time

Electoral change campaigners have been accused of wasting North Yorkshire County Council’s time after calling for ruling Conservative councillors to press colleagues in Westminster to introduce proportional representation.

A meeting of the council’s executive saw residents and councillors give impassioned responses to a proposal by the Liberal Democrat councillor for High Harrogate and Kingsley, Chris Aldred, for it to endorse proportional representation at all elections.

The meeting heard at the 2019 general election, across the eight constituencies in North Yorkshire and York, the Conservatives received 54% of the votes cast, but ended up with seven out of the eight seats.

Campaigners told the meeting how analysis of the county council’s elections since 2005 had revealed that on average UKIP needed 15,500 votes per councillor, the Green Party 6,900, Labour 4,500, Liberal Democrats 3,500 and the Conservatives just 1,900.

The meeting heard claims that many residents believed their votes did not count, resulting in only 35% of those registered to vote taking part in last May’s council elections.

Campaigners called for North Yorkshire to lead the way for “a fairer future” and highlighted the region’s role in historic moments such as the women’s suffrage movement and action to abolish slavery.

Read more:

The meeting was told the council’s Conservative administration had been formed despite the party’s candidates only receiving 41.3% of the votes, meaning nearly three in five of those who voted were not represented on the authority’s all-Tory decision-making executive.

After listening to numerous campaigners for 26 minutes, and opposition councillors state the reasoning behind the motions for a further 10 minutes, the authority’s deputy leader, Cllr Gareth Dadd, said the public would be “horrified” to learn the cost of officers’ and councillors’ time in considering the proposals.

He said: 

“This is, let’s be clear about it, political posturing, by opposition members, grandstanding for no purpose in terms of outcome for this authority.

“We should be getting on with things that we have some control over.

“This should not be used again as a platform for self-indulgent and party political promotion.”

Cllr David Chance, executive member for corporate services, said there were pros and cons to any electoral system and while proportional representation could lead to more voices being heard, the electoral system could see more unstable coalition governments.

He added: 

“The first-past-the-post system of voting has the advantage of providing a clear winner in every seat contested. 

“It builds a strong relationship with the locally elected officials and is a well known system of voting that is easy to understand.”

Ahead of the executive agreeing that it would not support the proposal, which will be considered by the full council in May, Cllr Chance said electoral reform was an issue that Westminster politicians would decide, but that it was not on the government’s agenda.

North Yorkshire County Council rejects calls to brand fracking as ‘inappropriate’

The leadership of North Yorkshire County Council has rejected calls to label fracking as “inappropriate”.

The council’s Conservative-led executive said it would not support Liberal Democrat and Green motions to declare hydraulic fracturing as inappropriate in the county, despite the council having declared a climate emergency and pushing forward plans to reduce carbon.

While the authority’s leaders have pointed towards Prime Minister Rishi Sunak reimposing the government’s ban on fracking which was last year lifted by Liz Truss, opposition councillors have claimed the moratorium could be ended again.

The recommendation to a full meeting of the authority later this month comes three years after Third Energy announced it would not use planning consent for the hydraulic fracturing of rock to extract gas in Ryedale which the council’s planning committee granted it, triggering a huge and sustained outcry.

The planning decision in 2016 lead to hundreds of thousands of pounds of North Yorkshire taxpayers money being spent on policing protests outside the Kirby Misperton site.

A meeting of the executive heard opposition members implore the authority to show leadership over climate change policies and agree that fracking, which was “the most polluting fossil fuel extraction” was incompatible with its ambition to be part of the country’s first carbon negative region.

Green councillor Arnold Warneken, who represents Ouseburn, said the motions simply looked to reinforce the council’s policies over fracking.

He said: 

“In this case we are not discussing the rights and wrongs of what we allow in our county, we are talking about saving our very existence.

“If we are going to ask all those third parties who are the major contributors to carbon emissions in this county to take us seriously, we can send strong messages out to tell them that we believe fracking is inappropriate.”

Read more:

However, the authority’s top legal officer, Barry Khan, advised the executive that approving the motion could leave councillors open to accusations of pre-determining potential hydraulic fracturing planning applications, which in turn could undermine the council’s ability to decide on schemes.

He said the Localism Act stated councillors could not be accused of pre-determining a proposal solely on the basis of something they had previously stated and while some other councils may have taken “a more liberal view” of the legislation he believed a cautionary approach was right.

Mr Khan said approving the motion would create “an element of risk” that was unnecessary given that the council had already set out its positions in its Minerals and Waste Plan.

Cllr Simon Myers, whose executive portfolio includes planning, said those pushing the motions risked having decisions taken out of the hands of locally elected councillors and given to government inspectors instead.

The authority’s opposition leader Cllr Bryn Griffiths highlighted how neighbouring East Riding of Yorkshire Council, which also has significant amounts of its jurisdiction under oil and gas exploration licences, had recently passed a similar policy opposing fracking.

The Liberal Democrat said councils had set out their belief that fracking was environmentally-damaging without raising issues over pre-determination.

Green councillor Andy Brown added it was quite reasonable for a councillor to take a political position on fracking as well as sit on a planning committee and consider evidence about whether the proposal would be environmentally damaging.