Listing of details of residents who comment on planning applications in pub - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

Hi Bryan, PARSOL / Information Commissioners Office provided guidance on this very subject. Page 7 paragraph 3.19 covers this. "3.19 Name and address of a person commenting on an application: You should explain that as comments on applications are generally regarded as forming part of the Statutory Register the local authority has a duty to make this information available and then explain that the consultation letter/website indicated that the information provided would be displayed on the local authority’s website. If the person still wishes their name and address to be removed, offer to do this but inform the person that the comment will now be treated as an anonymous comment and explain any differences in the weight given to anonymous comments as against named comments by the local authority (if this is the case). This may include, where this is the local authority’s policy, informing the objector that anonymous objections are not taken into account." Regards, Andy.

Hi Bryan, PARSOL / Information Commissioners Office provided guidance on this very subject. Page 7 paragraph 3.19 covers this. "3.19 Name and address of a person commenting on an application: You should explain that as comments on applications are generally regarded as forming part of the Statutory Register the local authority has a duty to make this information available and then explain that the consultation letter/website indicated that the information provided would be displayed on the local authority’s website. If the person still wishes their name and address to be removed, offer to do this but inform the person that the comment will now be treated as an anonymous comment and explain any differences in the weight given to anonymous comments as against named comments by the local authority (if this is the case). This may include, where this is the local authority’s policy, informing the objector that anonymous objections are not taken into account." Regards, Andy.

Names and addresses yes, but phone numbers, signatures and email addresses no. The Information Commissioner looked at this last year: http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fer_0220492.pdf see also old PARSOL guidance (e.g. para 3.19): http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/parsol/sds/PABCIO-V1.2.pdf

Steve, Yes you are quite right, I was assuming the rest of the PABCIO guidance has been followed i.e. no personal data, as you have mentioned. The difficulty I have found is when the service area responsible for publishing the reports is different to the planning team who tend to receive the removal request in the first place. Regards, Andy.

We have had two formal ombudsman’s complaints on this.... whilst public comments are removed from the application file page on the web, the committee reports are in perpetuity. Neither were upheld. Not only do we make sure that all letters we send out to neighbours warn them, but that there are warnings on all relevant web pages. We also try to help by only using surnames and first lines of addresses… But Google still puts 2 and 2 together and gives search results. Problem is that Councillors need to know who is supporting and objecting so they can declare personal interests.

Philip, Would you be willing to email me a bit more detail regarding the ombudsman complaints as we have one ongoing with the I.C.O at present and another request for removal with another application. I have added my email in case you are happy to provide the information. Regards, Andy. abyron@solihull.gov.uk

Thanks for the helpful replies. General consensus is names and addresses only, but with a warning. On a related note we are currently reviewing how we deal with statements made at committee meetings and intend to add to the warning something about information on the web maybe searchable, and that we can't guarantee that personal details included in the text of a comment will be removed.