Councillors were called “cowards” after voting down an attempt to reverse a decision previously taken by a senior officer not to defend a housebuilder’s appeal against a refusal of planning permission.

Redcar and Cleveland Council’s chief legal officer Steve Newton cited delegated authority bestowed on him in his role in the decision in July to withdraw from a planning inspector’s hearing of the appeal by Taylor Wimpey due this month.

The developer saw plans to build 114 new homes on land off Cat Flatt Lane, between Marske and Redcar, rejected in December by regulatory committee members.

Marske councillor Dr Tristan Learoyd brought a motion before the local authority, seconded by Councillor Niall Hargreaves, to reverse the “undemocratic, potentially unlawful and secretive” decision.

It was taken after the council received legal advice from a barrister which said the grounds given for refusal, which included that required access to the new estate through the existing Silverdale Gardens development would be detrimental in terms of highway safety, were “indefensible”.

The advice suggested the council had a 95% chance of losing were it to stick to its guns and could face costs of up to half a million pounds if the successful party pursued the costs involved.

There were cries from the public gallery of “cowards” and “hang your heads in shame” as it became clear the motion did not have enough support to be carried.

Only six councillors present voted for the motion with 32 against.

Mayor Neil Bendelow frequently had to call for quiet after interruptions and asked one woman who told council leader Alec Brown “you do our [the public’s] bidding” to leave the meeting.

Independent Cllr Learoyd cited examples of case law which he said showed potential costs could not be used as a reason not to defend an appeal against a planning outcome, however, his assertions largely fell on deaf ears.

He said: “We are in the realms of unlawfulness.

“The reason why we should be defending the case is because the decision was made by an officer unilaterally and not by councillors.

“By doing that the separation of powers between those who make the decision and those who carry them out has been broken.

“The democratic principle that you [a councillor] are elected and accountable for the actions of the council to the electorate has been broken as we did not make that decision.”

He added: “Are we happy for an officer to make a decision that councillors should be making?
“I am saying we should not be happy because the democratic accountability stops with us.”

Cllr Hargreaves, a Conservative, said: “It doesn’t sit right with me that as a council we don’t support the decision made [by the planning committee].

“Residents don’t feel very supported by the council, but plan to go to the inquiry and make their case.”

Summing up his position Cllr Learoyd said: “Three or four residents from that particular community are now defending this case and we have thrown them into the lion’s den with barristers from a developer.

“The costs are secondary, they are not as exorbitant as they are being made out to be and they would only occur should the developer push for costs and there is no sign that they would do that necessarily.

“Support the motion, support local democracy.”

Labour’s Cllr Brown said he could not support the motion and described Cllr Learoyd as “playing to the gallery”.

He said it was “ridiculous” to suggest the potential costs involved were irrelevant.

Meanwhile, Conservative group leader Councillor Carolyn Curr said: “We must safeguard all of our residents against huge costs that could potentially put half a percent on everyone’s council tax.

“It is incumbent on us all to proceed in a level-headed way that protects our residents from unnecessary additional financial burden, particularly within the current climate.”

Independent councillor Wayne Davies said he was a “bit torn” over the motion, suggesting elected members had been undermined while being respectful of the financial burden that could fall on taxpayers.

Get more content including the stories that matter to your community from The Northern Echo here.

Most read:

Conservative councillor Stephen Martin, who was on the committee which rejected the housing plans, said the council was “between a rock and a hard place”.

Another independent Councillor Craig Hannaway said Cllr Learoyd had made a “very powerful speech”, but claimed if the full council overturned particular decisions by particular officers it would set a precedent and the “life of the council would become very difficult”.

Mr Newton, who is the subject of a complaint from Cllr Learoyd, did not attend the meeting because of a potential conflict of interest, with another officer taking his place as a result.