THE decision to delay the suspension for the troubled Local Plan Strategy (LPS) by one month due to the upcoming General Election has been slammed by the Cheshire East Labour group.

In November 2014, Development Plan Inspector, Stephen Pratt recommended suspension of up to six months or withdrawing the Local Plan completely and re-submitting it at a later date.

A timetable with a number or workshops with partners of the Local Plan, which proposes a minimum of 27,000 new homes and 13,900 new jobs by 2030, was scheduled to resume in April.

However, last month, Cheshire East Council wrote to Mr Pratt requesting he grant an extension of the suspension period until the end of July.

The request was made on the grounds the council considered their ability to ‘effectively engage and establish common ground with their 'duty to co-operate' partners’ will be impeded’ in the weeks preceding the May 7 elections.

The letter said: “We recognise that any delays to the Examination of the LPS are undesirable but recognise the difficulties and potential disadvantage to our neighbouring local authorities were the programmed Workshops held during the pre-election period.”

The move has been criticised by the Cheshire East Labour Group, who has criticised the Conservative controlled Cheshire East Council for not taking the election into account when setting the timetable.

Planning expert and Labour Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Congleton, Dr Darren Price, said: “The importance of having an adopted plan cannot be over-stated.

“The Inspector clearly has concerns about the Cheshire East Local Plan.

“I would advise the Council to start making contingency plans in case the Local Plan cannot be fixed within the 6 month suspension period.”

The extension request was granted by Mr Pratt, who said he ‘fully understands the difficulties that the council may have’.

Mr Pratt said: “In the circumstances, I am content for the council to extend the current timetable for completing the additional work by the end of July 2015.

“This would probably result in a resumed hearing session to consider the work undertaken taking place in September 2015 before proceeding to deal with the outstanding matters in the examination.”