A last minute amendment over the Area Plan has provoked accusations of ‘skulduggery’ in Tynwald.

A motion on the Area Plan for the North and West failed to carry in Tynwald last month with the House of Keys voting 13 to 11 in favour but the Legislative Council voting against by one vote to six.

When the motion returned to the court this week for an combined vote, Treasury Minister Dr Alex Allinson ruffled features when he tabled a last minute adjournment, that only landed on members’ desks at 2.30pm.

It was clearly designed to try to persuade the waverers and get the Area Plan over the line.

But in the end his amendment failed as did the motion itself, with the vote split 16 to 16.

Dr Allinson urged members to support his amendment, warning there was otherwise a risk of ‘losing control of where and how development happens’.

But Kate Lord-Brennan (Glenfaba and Peel) said bringing the amendment was an ‘insult to this court and the public’ and it gave ‘no assurances whatsoever’.

‘It’s laughable,’ she said. ‘To think something likes this would make everything ok just won’t cut it at all. There’s not a chance I will support this amendment.’

Fellow Glenfaba and Peel MHK Tim Crookall said: ‘It seems like a bit of skulduggery here.’

The Area Plan allocates land for residential development, much of it on the outskirts of Peel and Ramsey, that could see 1,028 new homes built.

Some 313 acres of greenfield are proposed to be zoned for residential development, 106 of those around Peel.

Central Douglas MHK Chris Thomas proposed that the debate be adjourned so he could work up an amendment to Dr Allinson’s amendment.

‘It’s not an ordinary amendment, it’s been moved with a purpose,’ he said.

Cabinet Office Minister David Ashford insisted that the amendment did not radically change anything.

Julie Edge (Onchan) said if that were the case, what was the need of the amendment?

Ramsey MHK Lawrie Hooper opposed the adjournment, saying: ‘If you don’t like the amendment, don’t vote for the amendment.’

‘Everyone has had a month to come forward with an amendment,’ Speaker Juan Watterson pointed out.

‘I can assure members there’s no skulduggery involved,’ insisted Dr Allinson. He said Ministers had listened to the concerns and had sought to come up with a ‘common consensus’ for the right way forward.

The adjournment failed to carry.

Dr Allinson’s amendment emphasised that development would only be permissable if consideration was given to the provision of ‘all necessary services’.

It said the masterplan for land on the eastern edge of Peel must address the need for, and potential location of, community facilities, which may include education, health and social care facilities, a neighbourhood centre and sports/recreational open space.

Mr Thomas moved quickly to table his own amendment which called on government to report back on the implications of a residential land availability study.

Paul Craine MLC said he would stick with his vote from last time.

Sarah Maltby (Douglas South) said: ‘I’m so confused. I feel more distracted than I did before. We’ve got to the point where it feels like a big mess.’

Minister Ashford said that if Tynwald voted against the motion, the North and West would be left without an up-to-date planning framework.

He said it had boiled down to arguments about specific sites in Peel.

Critics said there was no need for the scale of additional housing proposed given the island’s population is not growing.

But Mr Ashford said it wasn’t just about increasing population, it was about the type of households, given the trend for fewer people living in each home.

Members need to consider their vote, he urged.

Mr Thomas’ amendment carried 31 votes to one.

There was more drama as Dr Allinson’s amendment resulted in a split vote of 16 votes for an against.

But the amendment failed as it required 17 votes.

The motion as amended by Mr Thomas also failed, again with 16 votes for and 16 against.