Here Councillor Richard Bennett, Leader of the Green Party, Richmond Borough Council, gives his view on a 'distressing' decision to allow the felling of five trees on a 'Backlands' site near Twickenham Green.

The scheme was approved by Council officials amid concerns local authorities do not have the powers they need to protect trees.

As contractors moved onto the site this week, residents have condemned the loss of these much-loved trees.

Richmond Council passed a Motion last week calling on the Government to review legislation on Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) to give greater weight to 'their vital environmental and ecological roles' rather than solely focus on visual amenity. It is worthy and received unanimous support.

However, what I insisted on addressing was the catalyst for this Motion, and it was, of course, the distressing loss of trees in the Backlands, off Hampton Road, behind the Prince Albert Pub and close to Twickenham Green. An area sold by Fullers to the Park Property Group.

I choose my words carefully. Our planning Department did not 'approve' the application to remove all but the one Eucalyptus tree that had an existing TPO. They simply did not have 'valid reasons to object'.

Residents have a problem in accepting that a large number of Objections does not mean that they are valid objections in planning terms.

I can confidently state our Borough's Planning Department is both very professional and very thorough. After four years on the Planning Committee I can vouch for that.

There was a statutory timescale of six weeks to consider this application and it was in the run-up to Christmas. Taking it to a Planning Committee to facilitate greater transparency and an explanation would have been difficult to achieve.

Nevertheless, 50 heartfelt, strongly expressed objections should alert us as a Council.

The public may not have the highest regard for politicians, but they do expect politicians to behave like politicians. They expect them to be concerned by public reaction and responsive to sensitivities - to hear the alarm bells when they are ringing.

When an application is evidently controversial, and there is a public disquiet amounting to outrage, it is our role to engage with the concern of the community.

I looked at the Backlands before its sale and took a photo. If I were wildlife, its wildness would certainly have made it a preferred location. But sadly no longer.

Developers do often appear to be gaming the Planning System. Their tactic is firstly to remove undergrowth, then remove trees from the site. This ensures that no wildlife could possibly remain as an obstacle.

Our residents need some reassurance. We are where we are, but when there is an outcome that creates this level of dissatisfaction the Council must strive to redeem itself.

The principal lesson to learn from the experience is that we make sure from now on that there is the fullest visibility of the developer's plans for the Backlands as they progress. The other lesson is to be prepared and mobilised to counter them.