An MHK insists government ministers should intervene on planning matters only when it is in the national interest.

The number of times that a minister has overturned the findings of a planning appeal inspector in the Isle of Man concerns Garff MHK Daphne Caine.

But, when she raised one such decision in the House of Keys, she came under fire from Environment Minister Geoffrey Boot - and Chief Minister Howard Quayle.

Mrs Caine told the Manx Independent she did not regret raising the matter, concerning a planning application in Laxey, to illustrate her point.

She said if a planning decision was of such significance that it warranted a government minister to overrule the recommendation of an independent inspector, then there was no reason why it could not be raised on the floor of the House of Keys.

’All I was trying to do was use an example of a very recent local issue that has concluded,’ she said

’If it is so unimportant that it should not have been raised in parliament, what is the minister doing getting involved?’

A minister should only intervene if the issue was of ’national, strategic importance’, she said.

Between June 2016 and May 2017, 11 planning appeal decisions had been overturned by the minister responsible for planning - two by Mr Boot and nine by predecessor Richard Ronan.

Mr Boot estimated that equated to 5 to 8 per cent of decisions.

The planning application Mrs Caine raised in the Keys involved proposals for the site of former holiday home Berberis Cottage near Pinfold Hill. An appeal was lodged after approval for a larger home was granted.

The appeal grounds centred on parking provision and the size of the new proposal and its impact on neighbours. Opponents argued that planners had relied on a ’misleading’ parking survey carried out during normal working hours - when many cars would not normally be present.

In January, independent inspector Michael Hurley recommended the appeal be upheld on the grounds the new dwelling would be ’substantially’ larger and could generate demand for multiple parking spaces, exacerbating the on-street parking issues in the area.

However, Mr Boot ignored the recommendation and upheld the original planning approval, stating he was not persuaded over parking concerns, pointing out the government’s highways services division had no objection.

He also found there was no material difference between the current application and a previous one that had received.

When Mrs Caine questioned the minister about it in the Keys, Mr Boot confirmed his reasons, but said the Keys was ’not a forum to start re-discussing a planning appeal’. He refused to reply to a follow-up question.

Chief Minister Howard Quayle criticised Mrs Caine, commenting: ’The House of Keys is not the place for individual members to be raising individual constituents planning concerns.

’We have to respect this House and really I am very disappointed with this.’

Mrs Caine rejected a suggestion that a legal petition was the correct procedure, saying that would not be something everyone could afford.

What do you think? Should a government minister be able to intervene in every planning decision? Email [email protected]

If you’d like us to include your views on our letters page, include your name, address and a phone number.

We need those details for verification purposes, even if you’d rather remain anonymous in print.