To receive the Civic Mayor's announcements and any apologies for absence.

Having previously declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the main item of business on the agenda, Councillors Steve Foulkes, Jeff Green and Anita Leech vacated the Council Chamber and did not take part in the voting thereon (minute 38 refers).

The Civic Mayor noted that apologies had been received from Councillors Kate Cannon, Tony Cottier, Paul Doughty, Sharon Jones, Christina Muspratt, Tony Smith and Gill Wood.

The Civic Mayor then invited Councillor Mike Sullivan to make a short personal statement.

Councillor Mike Sullivan addressed the Council stating that it was with some sadness that he had resigned the Labour Whip and thanked Members across the Chamber from all parties for their kind words of support. Although, having voted twice for Jeremy Corbyn to be Leader of the Labour Party, it was not himself who had left the Labour Party, but the Labour Party who had left him.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Phil Davies, then sought the permission of the Council to ask a question of the Director for Economic and Housing Growth.

A number of Conservative Members rose to request a ‘card vote’ and the Council divided as follows:

For the procedural motion (36) - Councillors R Abbey, J Bird, A Brame, P Brightmore, C Carubia, P Cleary, A Davies, G Davies, P Davies, W Davies, S Frost, P Gilchrist, L Grey, P Hackett, AER Jones, C Jones, T Jones, S Kelly, B Kenny, M McLaughlin, J McManus, C Meaden, D Mitchell, B Mooney, T Norbury, M Patrick, C Spriggs, J Stapleton, P Stuart, M Sullivan, T Usher, J Walsh, S Whittingham, I Williams, KJ Williams and J Williamson.

Against the motion (18) – Councillors T Anderson, B Berry, C Blakeley, D Burgess-Joyce, W Clements, T Cox, D Elderton, A Gardner, P Hayes, A Hodson, K Hodson, M Jordan, I Lewis, C Povall, L Rennie, L Rowlands, A Sykes and S Williams.

One abstention - Councillor G Watt (Civic Mayor).

Resolved (36:18) (One abstention) – That the Leader of the Council ask a question of the Director for Economic and Housing Growth.

Councillor Chris Blakeley, then with the Mayor’s permission, read out a letter from Richard Mawdsley, Director of Development, Peel Holdings, to the Leader of the Council in which Mr Mawdsley had criticised the Council for ‘grossly misrepresenting’ the figures for new homes Peel Holdings were due to deliver.

The Leader of the Council then asked a question of Brian Bailey, Director of Economic and Housing Growth regarding the figures quoted in two of the motions before the Council of 6,500 and 6,450 new homes attributed to Peel Holdings to be built at Wirral Waters. How much credence and confidence could the Council place in these being delivered putting the figures in the context of completing a Local Plan which would satisfy a Government Planning Inspector?

In advance of Mr Bailey’s response the Director of Governance and Assurance responded to a question from Councillor Ian Lewis and stated that as officers were not part of the debate and were not voting they did not declare interests, however any interests officers did have were declared through employment procedures and done so in writing to ensure there were no conflicts of interest.

Mr Bailey stated that the Council had a duty to identify sufficient land to accommodate the number of houses set out by the Government’s guidance in its formula. There was new Government guidance which now also set out a test of deliverability, not just identifying numbers but also numbers of completions in the period, especially in the first five years. The Council did have sufficient evidence from Peel Holdings for 1,100 homes to be delivered but it didn’t have evidence beyond that 1,100 so far although the Council was in a consultation period and open to further evidence being produced.

Responding to further questions, Mr Bailey stated the need to look at all sites within the Borough and identify sufficient land supply to deliver the number of homes required, there was no test for greenbelt sites akin to what there was for brownfield sites. The draft Local Plan would be presented for an ‘Examination in Public’ chaired by an independent Government Inspector and had to be deliverable otherwise it might be deemed unsound. The consultation process was asking the public, partners and developers to come forward and respond to what had been put forward and the Council would then be open to looking and listening to these submissions.