Friday 10 July 2020
Select a region

Code of Conduct complaint against ESC

Code of Conduct complaint against ESC

Thursday 20 February 2020

Code of Conduct complaint against ESC

A former Deputy has submitted a Code of Conduct complaint against the Education, Sport & Culture Committee.

Former Home Minister Peter Gillson has made the complaint, which he confirmed to Express was in relation to statements by ESC about a policy restricting parking at the two proposed 11-18 colleges.

In previous media statements, ESC has said there is a planning policy in place restricting the amount of staff parking at new developments. 

For example, in a media statement on 3 January 2020, ESC Vice-President Richard Graham said: 

"The proposals seek to provide parking for 75% of staff, however this is not a feature unique to the "two school model". It is the maximum any new development is able to provide under the planning policies approved by the States, and supports the aims of the integrated transport strategy to reduce the island's reliance on single use vehicles. This figure would remain the same in other education models and at any other site."

In another media statement on 12 February, Deputy Graham said this was in fact the "maximum reasonable amount" that could have been asked for.

"Providing parking for 75% of staff was the figure agreed, during our officers’ informal pre-application meetings with the professional Planners and colleagues from Traffic and Highway Services, as the maximum reasonable amount for developments of the nature we are progressing.

"In a previous public comment, I referred to the total we’re applying for as the maximum possible under the planning policies agreed by the States, whereas for absolute clarity I could have framed it as the 75% was the maximum agreed through those officer-level discussions if our planning application was to satisfy the policies upon which it would be decided.

"We could, of course, have chosen to put a higher amount in the planning application, but that would have been of questionable sense if the Planners had already advised it would go above what they considered reasonable for developments of this nature per the IDP and Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking Standards and Traffic Impact Assessment. Such a decision would almost certainly have resulted in the application falling foul of States planning policies, as advised by Planning officers."

The Bailiff's Chambers confirmed that the complaint had been lodged. 

Sign up to newsletter



Once your comment has been submitted, it won’t appear immediately. There is no need to submit it more than once. Comments are published at the discretion of Bailiwick Publishing, and will include your username.

There are no comments for this article.

To place a comment please login

You have landed on the Bailiwick Express website, however it appears you are based in . Would you like to stay on the site, or visit the site?