Councillor accuses Ben Houchen of pressuring him to act unlawfully

A councillor has claimed Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen and MP Sir Simon Clarke are pressurising him to act unlawfully in a dispute about planning procedure near Redcar.

Liberal Democrat member Tristan Learoyd, who chairs Redcar and Cleveland Council’s planning committee, has been asked to move forward the date of a planning meeting for a proposed electric arc furnace (EAF) to be built at British Steel’s site at Lackenby.

The EAF is part of British Steel’s plans to decarbonise its operations, which it says are "subject to appropriate support" from the Government. Another EAF has been proposed at British Steel’s Scunthorpe plant.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The less labour-intensive method, which recycles scrap steel, would signal the potential loss of thousands of jobs in Scunthorpe, but the creation of around 300 jobs on Teesside.

Lord Houchen hopes to be elected to a third term in office as Tees Valley mayor.Lord Houchen hopes to be elected to a third term in office as Tees Valley mayor.
Lord Houchen hopes to be elected to a third term in office as Tees Valley mayor.

In a letter sent last week and co-signed by Conservatives Lord Houchen and Sir Simon, who represents the neighbouring Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency, Coun Learoyd was asked to bring forward the date of a planning meeting to determine the decision on the EAF application by nearly a month to this Thursday.

They argued no objections from statutory consultees had been received and a decision could be made “at any point following March 3”.

The day before the Conservative politicians’ letter, Redcar Council held a vote to indicate its support for moving the decision meeting forward from April 3.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“We ask you in the public interest to respect the clearly expressed will of the council to progress this very significant and exciting proposal for our area,” Lord Houchen and Sir Simon wrote.

However, following advice from council legal officers, Coun Learoyd replied that he would “need a reason for which an item would be deemed ‘urgent’,” to move the meeting forward.

Section 100B (4) of the Local Government Act 1972 states that an item of business cannot be brought before a council meeting unless it has been publicly available as an agenda item for that meeting for at least five days, or that it is considered urgent.

Quoting Knowles on Local Authority Meetings – the guidebook on local authority procedure – Coun Learoyd said the definition of “urgent” business should be “legitimate”.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

According to the guide, “political expediency or forgetfulness on the part of reporting officers do not accord with the spirit of the legislation”.

Coun Learoyd said the pressure to move the date was “politically motivated”. The pre-election period, also known as “purdah”, begins on March 19 and restricts councils from making decisions or announcements that may appear political.

“Until now I have not been given a valid reason to hold the meeting on March 7, 2024,” he said. “I am not willing to do this and put the application and subsequent jobs at risk.”

Writing on X, Sir Simon Clarke added: “If Councillor Learoyd wishes to add weeks of delay, and further risk to this project, he needs to account openly and transparently for his reasoning.”

A British Steel spokesperson told The Yorkshire Post: “We’re committed to bringing this project forward at the earliest opportunity and would appreciate a decision as soon as practical.”

Related topics:

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.