Jackson Ng at Growth, Infrastructure & Housing Select Committee, 23 September 2026

Infrastructure for this plan was put at more than £6 billion with a clear funding gap. I think I raised this question in the last committee, the same committee, and we were told there was no extra central government funding and that developers and providers will provide most of the cost. However, there is a real infrastructure issue. I appreciate that we do need to build. The national government wants us to build. However, my understanding is Regulation 19 is the public's chance to test whether the gap is real. And I'm not asking whether the studies have been done or previous studies have been done. We dealt with that in the last meeting. But what I want to know is, since this has gone to the public, has there been any new, timed, funded commitment, whether it's water, sewage, highways, schools or health across the county that wasn't in the July evidence that's now been committed? Or is the funding gap still as substantial as it was when we last met? Thank you. I think the short answer to that is that no, there has not been any additional thing from...

Our residents know if anything comes true. I mean, are we expecting a certain time frame or is this going to work through, you know, for the next sort of five, ten years? Because you can appreciate it causes quite a lot of anxiety, particularly in my patch. Residents are come writing in and say, well, we are ready for capacity on roads, we're ready for capacity on schools, et cetera, et cetera.

So a couple of points I would make. So on the first part, then, we are having active...

Second question. At the last committee hearing, we were told that, and obviously in the report, that no data centres were allocated in the local plan or draft local plan because the need was judged nationally, not locally. Officers then accepted that that would stop speculative applications. Now, as Kevin Member would know, Beaconsfield and Jarrett's Cross has a data centre coming forward as part of the national scheme. That, in my opinion, is a test case for this county, but it will not be the last. I think there's another one coming around in High Wycombe. Larger data centres are treated, as colleagues know, as nationally critical infrastructure. The Secretary of State in Whitehall decides this council does not, unless we have, maybe through the local plan, a written role that applies across Buckinghamshire that protects our residents. So, Reg 19 asked the public to comment on a plan that allocates no such sites and offers only a criteria policy. I mean, what I really want to know is, will the Cabinet Member officers confirm that Buckinghamshire has no say on the Beaconsfield scheme or any future schemes across the county? And if so, what from the Regulation 19 responses on power, water, transport and the Greenbelt will be put forward to the Secretary of State? And what written influence would this council have on the next application that comes forward to Whitehall, wherever it lands? That's where I'm coming from. And I think that's quite, you know, given what I've seen happening across the county and across the country, this is of concern. Thank you. I think you make a number of points that are absolutely correct. I think the poll...

145 live planning appeals and about 40 live enforcement appeals. So I also understand the Council won about 84 % of the enforcement appeals. That's a good win rate, but how much money is being spent on appeals and how many of the 145 appeals are non -determination or delay cases? Thank you. I don't have any of that information in front of me, Councillor Ng, so I think I'll need to take that away, Chair, if that's OK. Of course.