Within the last few minutes the Derbyshire Wildife Trust has won a stay of execution for the Sanctuary Local Nature Reserve in the High Court.
The court has
· ruled that the temporary injunction stands and all equipment must be removed from the site
· awarded the Derbyshire WT a Protective Cost Order
· recommended that a full hearing on JR occur within 3 months
Quotes from the judge –
‘there is a serious issue to be tried here’
‘risk of permanent environmental harm to an area of county level significance’
The judge also rebutted the defendant’s assertion that Derbyshire WT had delayed in bringing the matter to the court and commented negatively that the defendant had moved at an unusually rapid speed in starting site clearance.
It’s a temporary reprieve – but it means that the battle can go on.
Many congratulations to the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust for being brave and standing up for nature.
Previous blogs on this subject (here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here)
[registration_form]
Well done Derbyshire Wildlife Trust that is exactly what the movement was set up to do.
Your membership could increase significantly with your courage on this issue.
Keep it up.
Respect
It was indeed an excellent example of a collaborative consortium working as a community conservation champion, congratulations to all involved and to Mark for using his ‘influence’ via the blogging network.
Yes, the WT movement used to be the champions for the natural world but all too often now they are constrained by building biodiversity project funding rather than good old fashioned conservation we all grew up with and were used to. Sad, but a sign of the times. Mark promotes that we all act and he’s right, the system(s) need changing and this is an example of people power?
Now the hard work will really start (not to mention the need to fund raise to finance it). Hopefully with Richard Buxton’s involvement they will win. But then, it starts again …. the developers will apply again and this time one assumes DCC will be more careful with the process. Sadly, if they then approve the revised application (unless the funders withdraw support for the project) conservation will have no right of appeal.
That’s not to say that DWT et. al. should not carry on, the principle is important and that’s why many of us wrote in as organisations and individuals against the application and the failure to adhere or comply with the published process.
The real problem is a Planning System which is not fit for purpose. The ConDem Coalition aka ‘greenest Government ever’ is hell bent (as in truth were others) on removing red-tape which constrained development.
If you want to see another example of a Local Planning Authority disregarding process then see http://swinemoor.wordpress.com/ where some wonderful practice is outlined.
Yes, well done but local authorities are not noted for their intelligence in environmental decisions.
Good but there should never have been any question about it. Thin end of the wedge for more than Derbyshire if we loose this one. (Hilary, Derbyshire)
As you correctly say Mudlark – the planning process is not fit for purpose and any revisions are all ones which favour development over conservation.
The planning control committee in Derby is supposed to look at planning applications dispassionately and not along party lines. Yet the ruling party ensures it has a majority such that it can always vote through whatever development it wants. It even allows the Chair two votes to ensure the majority gets its way!
Nick
Developers have a right of appeal to the Planning Inspector when an application is refused, however, objectors have no such right. They are forced to apply for Judicial Review (JR) which, under this government, has made it much more expensive to get a planning decision overturned. However, JR is very much ‘process driven’ that is has the Local Planning Authority (LPA) acted in accordance with the law, was its decision rational (i.e. not perverse) and did it follow procedure. In most cases it is the latter that JRs are fought on. In effect this means that, so long as they follow the process and ‘tick the boxes’ they can grant planning permission to favoured developments, safe in the knowledge that they are very unlikely to be overturned, even though they often fly in the face of local planning policies and even common sense!
I am not a lawyer but bitter experience tells me that, until we get a fair and balanced planning system, where objectors can appeal decisions, we will continue to have such blatant abuses of the system as Sanctuary LNR and Swinemoor Hospital, Beverley foisted upon us by our elected representatives. The planning system is broken beyond repair but it is not in the interests of those who fund our major political parties to change it……
Kieran – many thanks for this comment.