Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road shale gas sie, 27 September 2017. Photo: DrillOrDrop
People living within 1.5km of Cuadrilla’s shale gas site in Lancashire are to share a £100,000 community benefit fund, the company confirmed today.
The decision follows a public consultation with people living locally.
Cuadrilla said 79% of consultation participants from the parish of Westby with Plumptons wanted the money from the site’s second exploration well to go directly to households nearby.
But only 250 of the 741 eligible households (34%) participated in the consultation. And at least one resident said he wouldn’t take the money.
29 households within 1km of the centre of the site will qualify for £2,070. Another 259 households within 1-1.5km qualify £150. They must apply for the money within 30 days of a letter dated 30 October 2017.
John Tootiill, whose nursery is within 1km of the Preston New Road site, has supported opposition to Cuadrilla’s operation. He told The Guardian he didn’t want the money:
“It is absolutely the most appalling thing. How can you give money to compensate for affecting people’s health and spoiling their environment?
“What we want is our health. It’s just blood money really, because no amount of money can compensate for somebody’s health being affected. You can’t buy health. Most certainly I wouldn’t take it.”
The Green Party MEP, Keith Taylor, said in a statement today:
“These proposals are immoral and tantamount to bribery. Britain and the world is on course to miss climate targets. Kickbacks won’t keep catastrophic climate change at bay.
“Residents in Lancashire will not be swayed by a naked attempt to use bribery to divide and conquer communities. It is time for the Government to stop circumventing democracy and, finally, listen to the public.”
A £100,000 sum for the first well at Preston New Road has been paid into an independently-managed fund. Cuadrilla said a community panel would make decisions on how this money would be distributed. The panel is likely to be appointed by the end of the year and the first payments made in early Spring 2018. Money not claimed by residents for the second well would go into this fund, Cuadrilla said.
A consultation on the priorities for the fund suggested that people wanted money to go to local environmental issues (24%), health living (19%) and safety (14%).
Asked how the local community could be supported, 24% of participants said it should be through resident-led projects, while 18% said through existing community activities and services.
Categories: Industry
DRILL OR DROP? 
Lol “one” didn’t take the cash aye! Surprise Surprise. Wonder what our resident antis will conjure up in response :p
Peeny, do try to read the report, the “one”, it says is part of the 34% who participated but would not accept the money.
“But only 250 of the 741 eligible households (34%) participated in the consultation. And at least one resident said he wouldn’t take the money.”
741-250=491 did not participate more would not accept the money, is that clear now?
“at least one’ said he wouldn’t take the money, which means, one of the 491 plus the a number of those 34% who replied and would not take the money.
Quite different isn’t it? Another one who only sees what they want to see.
Have to say I’m genuinely shocked at that. As John Toothill said, you can’t buy health at any price. I’d certainly refuse this immoral money too.
Really interesting this reaction by a few when the vast majority of the UK population look with envy upon the Norwegian system where the population benefits hugely by the investment return from their massive Wealth Fund, produced by Norwegian oil and gas.
errr, not next to their homes, Martin…
‘Another 259 households within 1-1.5km qualify £150.’
£150? What a pathetic joke! HS2 are paying way over this just to ‘see’ the train whooshing past in the far distance….
Terribly cheap bribe isn’t it? It would be interesting to know if a gagging order accompanies the bribe?
I wonder if people realise you never accept the first offer?
They might have got 10 times that amount?
But I suppose in a country which has pushed the tax payer to the brink of penury by their own government which is supported by an off shore tax haven based industry, it’s really not that surprising.
It should not stop anyone from opposing and demonstrating against the industry of course, if it does it really is blood money.
“Only when the last tree has died,
And the last river been poisoned
And the last fish been caught,
Will we realise that we cannot eat money.”
This Cree Indian prophecy will come to haunt all those short sighted people who sell out to bribery.
I have to say that is a great shame that some people have accepted that money. We here in the Peak District fought a recent campaign to stop several wind generators being built. The challenge for us was to persuade others that the offer of £300 grand per each of 3-4 villages from the developers was nothing short of plain bribery.
We managed it – planning perm was refused and the company seems to have gone away (but they are rather schemers aren’t they, so who knows what’ll turn up next).
Paul Heppleston
I guess to compare apples with apples, you would have to refuse the wind turbine money, after they have been built, whether you wanted them or not.
But maybe you are kidding us. Why would anyone not embrace pollution free, non toxic, never ending, cheaper than everything power?
Sorry Sherwulfe you do post without a lot of thought. I presume your point is that the wells are off-shore? I suggest you visit Norway and you might find they have a great deal of maritime industry apart from oil and gas so the same proximity issues pertain. Strangely, you will also find oil and gas is delivered to land. I used to trade with Norway into their salmon farming industry and they had few concerns regarding oil and gas, and benefitted considerably by the marine technology spin offs and the infrastructure improvements.
It’s interesting that if the area had the average population density and household make up of Lancashire, then the payments to each household < 1km would have been just £85 each and between 1 and 1.5 km just £44 each.
A peanut compared to the loss in property values that will be inevitable, and you can't put a real price on health or amenity value.
IMPORTANT ……. HOW MANY ???????
How many of the people who are willing to accept this ” Pittance Payment ” are actually the owners of the properties they are living in ???
HOW MANY OF THESE PEOPLE ARE RENTING THEIR PROPERTIES WITHIN THESE BOUNDARIES ?????
HOW MANY PEOPLE are renting from
(1) Private Landlords ?
(2) Housing Association ?
(3) Council ?
People who fall in to the above three categories clearly would NOT give a ” monkey’s ” about the possible 10s / 100s thousands of house depreciation value, or the possible difficulties/extra cost in obtaining certain types of building cover .
Any difficulties obtaining buildings cover, may also effect the Mortgage Ability of a property …..
Err none.
How do you know GBK ???
Crystal Ball , Tarrot Cards, or maybe you know all the residents personally..
Jack
According to council information, there are no council or Housing Assiciation Tenants in that area. So .. private ownership and private landlords.
People renting could be in to a good deal, especially if they get 4 bungs for 4 wells. The landlord does not have to worry unless they plan to sell up, or struggle to get tenants. Rentals are holding up according to the Zoopla Data. There is only one house available to rent in Little Plumpton plus 1 mile.
For Little Plumpton, the average house price is £416,300, and prices have gone up over 3% this year, 24% in 5 years. ( Zoopla )
So no signs if massive property devaluation yet due to the activity or threat of it.
Re Insurance, Blackfriars Group have some information on insurance and fracking, and are cool about it.
Presumably the people living in the area have continued to get house insurance and mortgages. Similarly people at Kirby Misperton amd Knapton are not saddled with such troubles for the conventional extraction activities. Likewise those living next to Tier 1 and 2 COMAH Sites.
But one to keep an eye on, and any comments on my assumption welcome.
hewes62
The information you have provide regarding the % of rented properties within the proposed area was warmly received . It does indeed put that particular topic to bed ..
Regarding home devaluation, that is a different matter for which we will have to wait and see ..
What I can put forward though on the matter, is that the opinion of leading experts say the drop in house values could be substantial
http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/591985/Fracking-house-value-collapse-environment
A survey of Estate Agents say between 11% and 70% could be wiped from property values.
https://www.landlordreferencing.co.uk/forum/discuss/community-forum/uk-estate-agents-say-controversial-fracking-plans-already-affecting-home-sales/
As you will know, a crash in house prices can , right or wrongly occur on a ” perceived threat ” alone . This previous Drill or Drop report highlights the negativity people feel towards the fracking industry . The type of negativity that could well bring on such a crash.
https://drillordrop.com/2017/09/19/fewer-people-happy-about-living-near-a-fracking-site-than-a-nuclear-reactor-new-poll/comment-page-1/
What we do already know about home devaluation, is that this lady, living just 300 yards from Cuadrillas Fracking site had a whopping £ 535,000 wiped of the value of her property .
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2733336/Fracking-threat-wiped-535-000-home-s-value-Five-bedroom-home-valued-190-000-drilling-site-proposed-nearby.html
Jack
Thanks. Some info to digest
For the first link, I think the story is a bit pushy. They quote a 2% reduction in house prices for all houses in all fracking areas, and a loss of a lot of money. Mathematically it’s correct, but not likely, you would have to evenly frac all the PEDL.
They give a scare figure of 30% drop for houses close to the wells, and also talk of a 50 to 100% write down for properties near frac sites.
But so far, it has not happened. We shall see no doubt when or if the Preston Road Site develops further. One to watch.
Re the second link, I looked up all the houses sold or valued within 300 to 500m of the site. I could not find the house that had devalued by 70%. Other high end properties in the village are holding up in value, and continue to rise in value according to Zoopla. I would suspect it was a puff piece by the mail, as there has been no follow up ( was it sold, not sold, similar valuations to other houses etc etc ).
I hope the lady managed to sell her house close to her expected price. One similarly priced here in the village (750,000) is now 670,000 and not sold. The Grange was up for 850,000 and 4 years later sold for £580,000, it did deteriorate somewhat while the relatives held out for top dollar.
No fracking or drilling in view.
The lower end priced houses are snapped up as soon as they come on the market.
hewes62
AS FAR AS INSURANCE GOES, you may find it would be easier to push an ELEPHANT through the eye of a NEEDLE rather than decipher and accurately answer the minefield of questions insurance companies may want to put forward before a payment for fracking related damage is paid out …
https://www.clydeco.com/blog/energy/page/liability-for-fracking-will-current-insurance-policies-respond
What we do already know regarding Insurance cover is, that some people in certain circumstances, will face possible difficulties as the article below points out.
Householders affected by floods face insurance double-whammy if they live nearby planned fracking sites
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/householders-affected-by-floods-face-insurance-double-whammy-if-they-live-nearby-planned-fracking-a6804476.html%3famp
Jack
Yes, the insurance vs claim one in America is interesting. More later on that no doubt.