Agenda item

To answer any questions received from local government electors within Surrey in accordance with Standing Order 85 (please see note 6 below).

Four Public Questions were submitted. The questions and responses were published within a supplementary agenda on 17 December 2024.

1.    Jackie Macey asked the following supplementary question:

Your reply to my question concerning the applicant profiting from the unlawful production of oil at the Horse Hill site suggests a course of action has not yet been decided. I would therefore like to ask what is the committees view of this unlawful profit, do councillors feel that it should be ignored, and when do you anticipate your careful assessment will be concluded and the outcome shared with the public.

The Planning Development Manager responded, clarifying that the planning enforcement system was not designed to address issues related to the sale of oil or the profits derived from it. While enforcement action could be taken to address unlawful operations, it typically focused on rectifying planning harm rather than pursuing financial penalties related to profits. However, the Planning Development Manager noted that the case was still ongoing, so no conclusions had been definitively made at that stage.

2.    Deborah Elliott asked the following supplementary question:

It has been stated in previous responses from the committee that UKOG were looking to work with the council with regard to voluntary cessation and remediation on the site at Horse Hill. Will the committee publish the stages of the remedial work being undertaken and a time limit imposed for each stage.

In response, the Planning Development Manager explained that this matter was subject to ongoing discussions with the Planning Enforcement Team and other relevant organisations. It was stated that the information requested within the supplementary question was not typically made public as it was part of an active enforcement investigation, as there was a need to avoid prejudicing those discussions. However, if information became available that could be shared with the public during the process, it would be released.

3.    Sarah Freeman asked the following supplementary question:

In your response to my question, you emphasised what UKOG had done to vacate the site so far. You state that a continuous review is in place, but what exactly do you mean in your answer when you go on to say that there is an ongoing process of redetermination happening. Do the Planning department officers anticipate there being a new planning application?

The Planning Development Manager explained that the quashing of the decision in the Supreme Court earlier this year meant the application was now considered a live application for the planning team to determine.

4.    Trish Kiy asked the following supplementary question:

As the committee has previously stated, the information of how much oil has been obtained at the Horse Hill site since its activity became unlawful in June 2024 is publicly available. Can the committee explain why it did not take steps to prohibit this unlawful oil production for such a long time.

The Planning Development Manager stated that this question had been addressed in previous responses regarding enforcement action and that there was nothing further to add at this time. The Planning Development Manager agreed to compile previous responses into a single written response for the question for publication.