It was noted apologies had been received from Councillors Mark Hurrell and Sue Sammons.

Councillor Fraser Massey was elected as Chair of the Lower Thames Crossing Task Force for the 2024/25 municipal year.

The Chair acknowledged the meeting was being held on 29 October 2024 in place of the postponed meeting due to be held on 10 July 2024.

Councillor Sara Muldowney was elected as Vice Chair of the Lower Thames Crossing Task Force for the 2024/25 municipal year.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Lower Thames Crossing Task Force meeting held on 22 January 2024.

The Minutes of the Lower Thames Crossing meeting held on 22 January 2024 were approved as a correct record.

To receive additional items that the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency, in accordance with Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There were no Items of Urgent Business.

There were no Declarations of Interest.

The Chief Planning Officer presented the report as set out in the Agenda.  Members were asked to note the decision on the Lower Thames Crossing from Government had been extended to the 23 May 2025 and therefore, in the absence of a decision, there was very little update that could be given.  The Chief Planning Officer confirmed the Council’s position had not changed in terms of its stance on the crossing.  The Chief Planning Officer confirmed in relation to officer engagement, there was the ongoing burden that the Lower Thames Crossing placed and if the decision were to be approved, there would be work that officers would be engaged in.  Thurrock as a host authority, would undertake that work and the Council were still in negotiation with National Highways over the Cost Recovery Agreement to ensure the Council’s costs were recoverable. 

Members questioned and noted:

• Members questioned if the decision was due on the 23 May 2025 or up to.  The Chief Planning Officer advised, he believed it was up to, so the decision could come at any time.

• Members questioned in terms of costs, was it accurate that the Council had been able to recover reasonable costs.  Members further questioned with no further funding being provided, were the Council carrying the cost as it was believed there was still ongoing work being carried out.  Members questioned what the likely cost would be on Thurrock if they were unable to recover the costs.  The Chief Planning Officer could not provide the figure as it would be projected.  However, he confirmed he would be able to obtain the figure that would have been negotiated with National Highways for recoverable costs calculated during the examination process.  It was further advised future costs would be minimal, made up mainly of officer time through maintaining engagement with Lower Thames Crossing staff.  The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that it was hoped the Council would be able to agree a Cost Recovery Agreement in the near future and it was explained this would allocate costs per hour for the Council’s engagement, including but not limited to, preliminary work and trying to access the Council’s data.

• Members questioned how much the decision delay would affect the Council’s Local Plan.  The Chief Planning Officer advised the challenge the Council faced in respect of the Local Plan and Lower Thames Crossing was the understanding of growth coming forward and where should growth be allocated.  The Chief Planning Officer confirmed there was a direct link in the lack of decision regarding the Lower Thames Crossing and the Local Plan.  The Chief Planning Officer advised there was a timetable the Council were committed to, to prepare its Local Plan and the Council would therefore have to balance and mitigate the risk as the plan moves forward.  Reassurance was given that officers were working hard to ensure the evidence base was in place to produce the Plan.

• Members questioned if it was known if there was a private finance initiative being a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.