Campaign

Reaction to suppliers quitting fracking contracts

 

ffl-cuadrilla-and-lfs-logos-main

Cuadrilla, its supporters and opponents have made statements this afternoon following the decision by two contractors to stop working at the Preston New Road fracking site.

Just before 9am today, Moore Readymix said a protest blockade outside its depot in St Anne’s had given it no alternative but to cease supplies to the site being prepared for shale gas exploration. (DrillOrDrop report)

Yesterday at 1pm, Armstrong Aggregates said it was terminating all work with Cuadrilla following a blockade at Montcliffe Quarry in Horwich. (DrillOrDrop report)

Frack Free Lancashire

“There have been and will continue to be peaceful protests wherever this unwanted industry imposes itself on a community. People are exercising their legal right to protest against fracking when all three levels of our democratically-elected officials have rejected it. In Lancashire, a parish, a borough and a county council all said a loud and clear no to the fracking industry.

“There are still outstanding legal challenges ongoing against Cuadrilla and the Secretary of State, yet Cuadrilla have chosen to disrespect this and relentlessly press forward with their work on the Preston New Road site before the High Court cases are heard. Did Cuadrilla honestly believe communities would stand back and watch this destruction continue, unchallenged?

“The fact that both Armstrongs Group and Moore’s Readymix have recently chosen not to continue working with Cuadrilla, is clearly their own business, but we are extremely pleased that they have reassessed their relationship with an industry that has no democratic place nor social license in our communities.”

Frack Free Lancashire added that it condemned all violence against peaceful protesters. A protester was hurt in a collision with a vehicle at Moore’s Readymix Concrete earlier today. Frack Free Lancashire said witnesses had made statements that some drivers had been incited to “run over protesters”.

Cuadrilla Resources

“The intimidation and bullying by hard line activists who are from outside the area against some of our North West suppliers is disgraceful.

“They are preventing hardworking people from running their businesses and earning their living.  Whilst we empathise with suppliers who take the difficult decision to terminate contracts with us due to unrelenting intimidation we and our main contractors will not be brow beaten by a small group of irresponsible bullies.

“Lancashire jobs and revenue opportunities are at stake and we will not allow activists to rob the county of those.”

Lancashire For Shale

Tim Freshney, a steering Group member and a financial backer of the group which supports Cuadrilla’s operation, said:

“People have a legitimate right to peaceful protest, but some of what we’ve seen in recent days goes above and beyond this. We find it totally unacceptable that small employers are being targeted with blockades and intimidated into withdrawing from contracts.”

56 replies »

  1. It would appear that the antis and local objectors prefer not have local employment? There will be plenty of contractors willing to come from outside the area, driving longer distances, creating more pollution (I thought one of the perceived problems was vehicle pollution?).

    • Paul – they won’t need plenty of contractors for PNR – their own environmental statement made it clear that the net direct, indirect and induced employment would only be 11 FTEs for this site. It as interesting to see a guy from Tipperary who lives in Cheshire on TV tonight whining about protectors not being local. I don’t think irony is Mr Egan’s thing is it?

      As to “local” employment AE Yates – the major contractor isn’t even from Lancashire – they are based in Greater Manchester.

      • Refracktion, while only 11 FTE’s, how many more would be less than full time? It seems to me that this number be substantially higher. BTW, 11 full-time, high paying jobs is nothing to sneeze at either.

        • At the Public Inquiry into Cuadrilla’s Appeals for the PNR and Roseacre sites, which I attended, Cuadrilla were asked how many full time jobs would be created by each site. Cuadrilla’s reply was 11, that’s eleven, full time jobs per site and they would be mainly in security and cleaning. Hardly ‘high paying jobs’.

          • Those are good jobs to many people. And the company is creating work for hundreds of people along the supply chain (or is trying to despite the efforts to squash this productivity by extremists).

            • Peeny – read the documentation – the 11 include direct, indirect and induced. You do KNOW what those terms mean don’t you?

              • Yes, and I repeat, Cuadrilla is creating work for hundreds of people along the supply chain. Someone has to mine the aggregates, someone has to screen and filter and rinse them, someone has to move them, someone has to account for the business. These aren’t jobs that are created, but they are helping keep people in work in their existing jobs, and helping to keep the economy healthy. There is quite a lot of value in that, just ask any business owner or worker.

              • Until the next well pad is constructed, right? If the firm is going to spend tens or hundreds of millions to develop, they are going to have to pay someone! They aren’t going to just throw money into the street. Someone will benefit, just not those companies who are being terrorized by the extremists.

        • Peeny – in case you didn’t know an FTE is the hours worked by one employee on a full-time basis. The concept is used to convert the hours worked by several part-time employees into the hours worked by full-time employees. On an annual basis, an FTE is considered to be 2,080 hours, which is calculated as: 8 hours per day. x 5 work days per week. It’s an education for you coming here isn’t it 😉

      • Well the “protectors” as you call them don’t appear to be “protecting” jobs. Perhaps you will get the druids up soon as they have finished at Brockham?

        • Sorry Paul but how can a couple of specialist jobs for specialist skilled workers and the odd labourer equate to losing the Fylde’s tourism and farming industries? Seriously you cannot be serious?

      • Excuse me Refracktion [Edited by moderator] when did GREAT MANCHESTER NOT form part of LANCASHIRE! Oh dear!

        • As of 1st April 1974 as a result of the Local Government Act 1972. Is that all clear now Malcolm?

          BTW I’ve had photos of my house and threats of violence posted online [Edited by moderator]

  2. LANCASHIRE JOBS AND REVENUE AT STAKE
    Fylde Tourism industry at stake while
    Cuadrilla cynically smear protestors

    At the inquiry into Cuadrilla’s shale gas plans, we heard how fracking in Lancashire could damage tourism.
    Cuadrilla stated that tourism would initially be affected and that it was possible jobs that could be lost in the tourism sector, but claimed this was likely to be short-term.

    One of the residents’ campaign group barristers (the residents who stand daily opposite the site) asked Cuadrilla why they thought that fracking’s impact on tourism jobs would likely only be short-term.

    Cuadrilla’s response was to claim that when the industry is established (i.e. when we’re living in a gasfield, with a hundred well pads and thousands of wells at various stages of drilling, fracking and production) tourism will recover!

    The residents’ barrister quizzed Cuadrilla about what evidence they had that tourism would recover after being hit in the short term, Cuadrilla responded: “I don’t have any evidence. There may be evidence but I don’t have the knowledge”.

    To this speculative gem, Fylde residents’ barrister responded: “As a tourism draw, fracking is unlikely to be up there.”

    Cuadrilla also denied any impacts from fracking and admitted that only 22 jobs would be created by the two exploration sites, mostly in cleaning, security and possibly well decommissioning. Jobs involved in the building, drilling and fracking of the wells would go to people from outside Lancashire.

    Impacts of fracking would be the loss of tourism jobs in our £3.8 billion and growing tourism economy; 22 local jobs created by fracking over the next 5 years, and; a whole host of other problems – impacts which Cuadrilla and their willing local letter writers would rather we didn’t look too closely at, but look closely we must, as many of our livelihoods depend on the tourism industry directly or indirectly.

    These problems – the impacts that Cuadrilla so brazenly denies will occur – created by the fracking industry, should it ever scale up to fulfil Cuadrilla’s dream of turning the Fylde coast into the largest gasfield in Europe with 4,000 – 6,000 wells, are:

    – significant increases in violent crimes,
    – property crimes,
    – drug abuse,
    – housing costs,
    – traffic fatalities, and
    – an increase in the rate of sexually transmitted diseases.

    To cope with the impacts of Cuadrilla turning Fylde into the largest gas field in Europe, local government (and our taxes) must pay for additional police and ambulance and fire services to address the rising crime and motor vehicle accidents. Health services would have to address the associated rise in drinking and sexual diseases. Local government would also have to increase staffing to assist more local families and individuals who can’t find affordable housing. An increase in homelessness is also likely.

    Cuadrilla are unlikely to repeat their admission that tourism jobs that will be lost as they turn the Fylde Coast into Europe’s largest gas field, so allow me to repeat the Fylde residents’ barrister’s words: “As a tourism draw, fracking is unlikely to be up there.”

    Cuadrilla’s cynical statement today – that we have more to fear from passionate protestors protecting our £3.8 billion per annum tourism industry, than we do from their aims to turn the Fylde Coast into Europe’s largest gas field – is just another petty PR attempt to deflect our gaze from the detrimental impacts to local jobs and taxes that Cuadrilla’s fracking will have upon the Fylde Coast.

  3. It was always going to lead to anarchy on the anti side. The hardcore element of the groups arguments are 99% based on “what if” and play off of a broken record. There is no genuine interest to be educated or it seems be respectful to people that are only trying to do their jobs . I can assure you today’s actions have caused irreversible damage to the anti cause as a whole. Despite being pro capitalist I feel sorry that genuine campaigners who perhaps have a house located close to a potential site will unfortunately be tarnished with the same dirty brush. The fact no one has come out on the anti side to distance themselves from the thuggish element speaks volumes.

    • Sorry but the local environment Protectors like myself are only to be pleased to receive out of town support. After all fracking seems to be a particularly English problem, it is banned, stopped or uneconomic to do safely virtually everywhere else!
      Please research before re-posting your rubbish again!

  4. I wonder where our food is going to come from when the rain and air are contaminated with pollutants!! Is there any long term thinking, or is it just money, money, money!! Future generations living with the mess we leave, needlessly!

    • L.M. “when the rain and air are contaminated with pollutants” ? Where are these pollutants coming from? Agriculture is the dominat source of soil pollution.

      Where do you think your food comes from now? How do you think it gets to you? How is it grown? Hydrocarbons play a key role in every aspect of food production and transport if this is what you are alluding to. Do farmers in the Fylde not use tractors? Other than potatoes and pheasants with bird flu, what do they grow there?

      The problem we face with food production is not “rain and air contaminated with pollutants” but too many people and not enough food. It would appear that we need even more intensive agriculture and even GM to keep everyone fed.

  5. I feel the protesters today were less about anti fracking and more about having “any” cause to behave in an intimidating thuggish manner.
    The protesters today also claim the driver involved in the incident was arrested, however the police have confirmed there were no arrests, again showing the protesters today are Drama Queens and determined to incite trouble.
    The protesters go on about having a legal right to a peaceful protest. Why, then, the need for most to cover their faces? Screams to me that they are waiting for a reason to “kick off” then hide behind facial anonymity.
    I am local to PNR and my thoughts on fracking are mixed but one thing I am sure on is no one knows the true pros and cons either in the short or long term.

    • How local are you L.G.? Local enough that the prevailing wind will blow fracking’s pollutants towards your family home or your children’s school? Somehow I doubt it!
      I live in Warton and the toxins will blow all over the Fylde from hundreds of flare-offs if we don’t STOP it now. Be very afraid, I know I am!

  6. “Why, then, the need for most to cover their faces? Screams to me that they are waiting for a reason to “kick off” then hide behind facial anonymity.”

    Ask Peeny or his pals Backing Fracking – They are familiar with the idea of wanting to remain anonymous – perhaps they can give us a clue?

      • But Peeny – you know I am John Hobson and you delight in telling everyone (not that that bothers me as I am proud to be who I am)

        One of your pals even put my full name on here yesterday before it got edited out by the moderator. LOL.

        So on what basis do you claim I am anonymous?

        You on the other hand don’t have the courage in your own convictions to say who YOU are.

        But go on Peeny – you can still surprise us – who are you? (Or are you ashamed to tell us?)

  7. Of course, we know the pros and cons! That’s why people are protesting against fracking all over Britain! You need to inform yourself. Go talk with the people from Pennsylvania and northern Germany many of whom have had their lives destroyed not only from the noise and the degradation of their environment but from cancer as their water supply becomes contaminated and even their soil; farmers complaining that their livestock is dying. The toxic damage to their environment and health caused by fracking is irreversible.
    So please treat protesters with thre respect that they deserve for their concerns are genuine and TRUE.

    • I have a place in PA, very close to several wells. Our area is beautiful and fracking hasn’t changed that. There are always a few extremists who will protest anything and whine about everything, but all of our neighbors live contentedly and we don’t even think about the well pads in the area now. We don’t even notice them. All of your fearmongering is simply that.

        • Jack, you need to dig a little deeper. From the study you cite: “The precise cause for the increase in inpatient prevalence rates within specific medical categories remains unknown.” (Page 14)

          Hmmmmmmm. And you are trying to prove a definitive and causal relationship. Well, the authors don’t exactly agree with you do they?

          Also, note that the county with the lowest hospitalization rate was the county with the highest number of wells.

          Note too that the authors were accused of playing games with the numbers in their study. They omitted data from two zip codes with numbers that contradicted the thesis that fracking caused hospitalizations.

          Another thing that might surprise you is that though the rate of hospitalizations during the study period remained flat or declined, the rate of fracking increased dramatically. This would certainly contraindicate a causal relationship.

          You might also note that one of the study’s authors is an avowed anti-fracking activist.

          Hmmmmmmmmm. You got any more great evidence???

          • hballpeenyahoocom
            You can try and dismiss this report ( like all the others ) from Pennsylvania University all you want. The evidence is there in plain English for all to read.

            We will let the British public who read these forums make up their own minds.

            I have shown you a long list of world leading experts in medicine, science and engineering, from some of the world’s most respected organisations, who have come forward to warn the public of the serious, potential dangers of fracking.

            ((((((( You Dismissed them ALL and although requested, you have failed to supply one ounce of evidence to substantiate your sweeping dismissal of these world leading organisations. )))))))
            WHY IS THAT ??????

            I’m sorry, yes you did put forward the US, EPA study as evidance, but as I had shown you with previous evidance, most people after clicking on to and reading the links I put forward would now consider the EPA study laughable. It would appear that they were severely restricted in how, where and what they can look into. Although the financial budgets of the EPA had been severely cut and they were put under undue pressure from what appears to be an industry that is FAR to cosy with the US government.

            THEY STILL found evidence of water contamination.

      • Hballpeeny: I’m not even a ‘commie, hippy, tree hugging activist’; I’m just somebody who has read and heard enough about fracking to know that it is the most desperate way to take energy from the ground and there will always be leaks quite apart from the fact that it contributes very negatively to climate change. Of course you must be one of those climate deniers too. I just hope you’re not an investor in fracking in the UK. And if you are, call you’re losses and think about investing in Renewables. We really don’t want fracking in the UK. This is not Texas but a small, densely populated island. Go frack the desert if you must but of course, difficult to find the millions of gallons of water needed.

  8. You missed out Jack, that within the US EVERY fracking site has a high proportion of obese people within a 50 mile radius. Or perhaps that gem is being reserved for the FOE?

  9. Oh dear the proponents of fracking are reeling and resorting to ever desperate measures to try and vilify their opponents. It won’t work. Numbers are against them. Truth is against them.

    • Well Barbara – the truth will tell – when Cuadrilla drills and fracks the well at Preston New Road. What amazes me is that the antis (I see local residents who object as genuine objectors, NIMBYs like myself with wind farms, and not necessarily in the FOE anti industry “anti” category) continue their hype and swampy tactics despite losing pretty well every recent oil and gas planning application to date, not just shale & fracking. I also see a lot of on the fence people turning against the protestors (again, not necessarily the local residents who will be impacted) and swaying towards support for the oil companies. Fortunately there are too few national and international swampys to go round. LOcals are getting fed up with the swampy tactics.

      • Believe it was Cuadrilla who went ‘National’ on this question. Lancs CC and local parish councils supporting the public and voted against these developments. So there are no ‘losses of jobs’ given the decision locally was not to entertain this industry further. The decision to over rule that was made by a Tory Minister, who received 16K of conference expenses from a thinktank funded by Kochs and Exxon. Effectively by going national Cuadrilla have opened this up to national protest which is only right because I for one would hate to see the beautiful county of Lancashire become a ‘sacrifice zone’. With regards to ‘bullying tactics’ there were no arrests at either of the two suppliers who were peacefully picketed. Interestingly enough the Chapter 2, general duty of directors (section 170-181) of the companies act 2006 should provide guidance to directors of these and other companies, in particular section 172(1)a-f.

        • Not sure what you mean Peter? What has Cuadrilla’ share price got to do with this? I didn’t realise Cuadrilla were listed but perhaps they are. The point is they will drill and frack the well. They will find that the flow rates are very good, probably even pre-frack, like the earthquake well. They will then try for development. I don’t recognise you as a long term poster on here, but if you were you would know that I don’t expect development of shale gas to go ahead. Not because of economics, protectors, protesters, swampys, druids, FOE, Greenpeace, WWF, climate change or any subsurface issues, but because of traffic and or noise issues, we are too densely populated, development will not get planning permission. But no reason not to drill and test a few low impact exploratory wells to see what is down there.

  10. Some on here should have look at today’s Times. You have a problem of your own making, following the problem created by FOE.

    It may be more rewarding to sort out your own house, rather than blame others for saying it needs sorting. How do the moans about “bullying tactics by Ineos” look now?

    I will be interested to see whether the “tactics” change for Yorkshire. [Edited by moderator]

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s