Campaign groups outside Cheshire West and Chester Council when the IGas application for Ellesmere Port was decided. Photo: Frack Free Upton, 25/1/2018
Campaign groups Ellesmere Port Frack Free and Frack Free Upton have joined forces to defend the decision to refuse planning permission for testing a gas well at Ellesmere Port.
The scheme, proposed by IGas, was rejected in January 2018 by Cheshire West and Chester Council planning committee. The committee said the scheme did not comply with local planning policy, which required applications to address climate change and make the best of opportunities for renewable energy.
In July 2018, IGas appealed against the refusal and a public inquiry is due to start on 15 January 2019.
The campaign groups have been granted Rule 6 status, which means they have a right to legal representation, present evidence to the inquiry and cross-examine witnesses. Their case has been backed by the local MP.
A spokesperson for the groups said today:
“Clearly we are disappointed that IGas has appealed this decision, it is both a waste of public money and people’s time when a democratic view has been expressed.
“However we are pleased that the Inspector has recognised the strength of feeling locally on this issue, reflected by the high number of objections to the original proposal, and granted a public hearing.
“There are many reasons for opposing this proposal from local air pollution and noise, to the need to reduce our gas consumption to mitigate the climate change which is being seen this week in record storms around the world.”
The groups said they were assembling “a team of experienced and committed professional experts to support the case for refusal”. This included a barrister with experience of unconventional gas development and experts on climate change, environmental protection and geology, they said.
Chester MP Chris Matheson said:
“I have been an enthusiastic supporter of the anti-fracking movement in Cheshire, but it has always been the people as well as politics that has stopped the frackers so far.
“Now IGas have appealed against a clear decision made by democratically elected councillors, we find ourselves asking again for the support of the people.”
The groups have set up a fundraising webpage (link here)
After January’s refusal of the Ellesmere Port scheme, the IGas chief executive, Stephen Bowler, said:
“We are very disappointed by the Committee decision that goes against the recommendation of their Planning Officer and is an application that accords with both national and local planning policy as set out in our planning statement and has the necessary environmental permits in place.
Our businesses have been operating exploration and production sites in a safe and environmentally sensitive manner across Britain for many years, engaging with communities and employing local people and investing in the local supply chain.
“We are at a critical juncture in the future of our energy mix and supply, as we move away from coal towards lower carbon energy sources. We are currently importing c. 50% of gas and that is set to rise to nearly 80% by 2035.”
Inquiry details
The inquiry is scheduled to last six days.
Interested parties had until today to submit their case. The council must submit it case by 28 September and the two campaign groups by 11 October 2018.
Planning Inspectorate page for the inquiry
Categories: Regulation
DRILL OR DROP? 
Please support this cause if you are able to by clicking the fundraising link above. We don’t need such a nascent industry being forced upon us. We have existed this long without UK onshore shale gas. You can’t miss what you never had, can you?
They said the same about fire and the wheel Waffle. Stone age comment-appropriate.
Some could miss it. Maybe like the two thirds majority who have no inclination currently to be anti.
Or two thirds majority who have no inclination to be pro, Martin no matter how many times you make this statement it doesn’t make it right, you cannot assume a preference either way. But what we do know of those that participated in the survey thad did have an opinion only the minority supported fracking.
‘They said the same about fire and the wheel Waffle.’
no they did not
Good morning again ladles and jellyspoons. The season turns to mists and mellow fruitfulness, which in English means rain of course.
Elsewhere we see it is hurricane and typhoon season and these are now being called “super” hurricanes and “super” typhoons with unprecedented wind speeds and destruction and loss of life. Perhaps we should call it “super” climate change in “honour” of the fossil fuel pump designation of “super” fuels and “super” climate change “super” deniers of course?
Here at home we seem to have entered the silly fracking season as well?
With the “from out of town travelling fracking pre emptive In Junk Sham circus” coming to a village, town, city and practically every beauty spot near you?
Delightfully and amusingly escorted and outnumbered by the slow walking brightly costumed troupes of scowling yellow jacket “frowns”? Sort of anti anti scary “clowns”, tripping over their enormous Bob Martins…..and throwing buckets of cold water over the proceedings.
No doubt each provided with the standard issue government corporate industry blinkers so that they cannot be allowed to see any illegal activity by the operators of course? Whilst simultaneously concentrating solely on the local populace who might dare to actually raise a voice in protest and then descend upon such outrageous behaviour with faked up illegal eviction notices akimbo?
Silly season indeed?
This is the latest report by “The Fracking Farmhouse” David Kesteven, “A message to Claire Perry” which addresses the attempts to make exploratory wells “Permitted Development” and also speaks of the now infamous phrase “travelling circus” and its real implications.
(complete with your favourite cats jelly and Oscar Paul, just for you)
I often find it curious that the industry and government always accuse any opposition to fracking and its associated avoidances of the word with its own crimes. We see that so often here on Drill Or Drop, it has to be a conscious or unconscious desire to turn their own failings into accusations and are quick to accuse the protectors of the very thing they are guilty of themselves.
As I have said before, that is a well known condition known as transference or psychological manipulation or projection blaming as it attempts to absolve their own guilt by accusing others of it. It speaks of something deeper than just avoidance of responsibility.
This is our dear friend Ian R Crane, so beloved of the anti antis on these pages and this also speaks of the plans to make “exploratory” sites in fact there is nothing “exploratory” about them hmmmm….explore a tory?
I think I will pass up that particular offer in certain twitchy examples, I might catch something.
This is on the subject of “Is permitted development for allowing the dumping of toxic nuclear waste?” A thorny subject as we have seen before on this blog, however love or loath Ian R Crane, he is certainly a weather vane for opening up the usually staid constrictions of what certain agencies would like to be buried in personal attacks and character assassinations, and that in itself is a revealing strategy.
Incidentally, considering the usual accusation of conspiracy theories, do any of you know where the term originated?
On November 22, 1963, when JFK was assassinated, many began to question the official narrative of “the impossible bullet”. The CIA then issued a memorandum, Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term “conspiracy theories” … and recommended methods for discrediting such theories. The dispatch was marked “psych” – short for “psychological operations” or disinformation – and “CS” for the CIA’s “Clandestine Services” unit.
This memorandum was sent to official bodies and the media to instruct them to call any such attempts at questioning the official story as “conspiracy theory”. This mainly originated from the querying by many of how a bullet managed to pass through two people in the limousine and then reversed direction with enough energy to deliver the “kill shot” to JFK? When the Zupruder film appears to contradict the official narrative. That theory, one of many that become increasingly convoluted over time, became known as the “magic bullet” theory.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-23/1967-he-cia-created-phrase-conspiracy-theorists-and-ways-attack-anyone-who-challenge
The truth? We may never know, but one thing is certain, that the CIA were clearly using psyops terminilogy to debunk any attempt to question or discredit the official narrative, and we see that here on Drill Or Drop all the time, perhaps all such psyops attempts to call anything the anti antis do not like as being called “magic bullets” in future?
Did anyone notice the particularly Hillary twitch of disMay brexit non event non negotiation, non progress speech the other day?
And speaking of a non negotiable dead duck brexit, did anyone notice the return of the Black Watch parade last weekend in Perth, where far from parading.
The BW were carrying out some type of 360 degree armed patrol display openly in the streets of Perth? This was received by shocked horror and silence from the watching people of Perth.
One could only guess that this was a practice run for the future streets of England in the non event of a no go brexit non negotiations non agreement non event stand off?
You really can’t make this stuff up? I suppose we are as yet fortunate it was camouflage uniforms, not black uniforms?
What has this to do with fracking? well, everything actually, because a non agreement brexit will mean that UK will no longer have to comply to EU ecology regulations and they are pushing for de regulations just as hard as they dare all ready.
We all know what that will mean, permitted development and nationally significant infrastructure get out of jail clauses and EA rubber stamps all around the clock.
Perhaps that JFK style “magic bullet” will deliver the kill shot to democracy in this country after all this time?
You really can make this stuff up Phil c…… have you been on a conspiracy course with you know who?
It was fully booked for anti antis screaming about 14 year old children with ASD and fake eviction notices with special courses on poisoned dogs and vandalised rigs whilst wearing flat cat fat cat frack hats?
Booked up apparently.
I hope you enjoyed the course?
Magic bullets all of them.
Sorry KatT, the issue is not being pro. The issue is there is a perfectly legal process that some would like to make illegal. To move something from legal to illegal you need to have a MAJORITY AGAINST to claim a mandate. If it was illegal you would need a majority of pros to produce a mandate to push for it to be legal. That is NOT the current situation, so is irrelevant. You confuse the two situations, as do a number of antis, and I give you the credit you are more intelligent than that and know exactly what you are trying to propose. What I give you no credit for is that you think you can fool others with such nonsensical twisting of market research data. I think your audience deserves better. You are utilising that most against fracking are not well informed on the subject. That may be the case, but I don’t believe they are unintelligent, and some may actually have some experience in market research. I will keep my comments aimed at them.
Martin Collyer. Something may be legal but that doesn’t necessarily make it right.Hitler’s regime was legal at the time.
So the majority of the council said no, legally. Your comment as usual makes no sense; is in fact nonsense.
‘The issue is there is a perfectly legal process that some would like to make illegal.’ – this makes no sense.
You can break the law, you can act illegally, you can participate in illegal activities or you can change the law but you cannot MAKE a process illegal.
Sorry Pauline. That is a totally different point. We both know that but it is the way you defend trying to make out the antis are a majority. When it is identified you are not, you try to deflect to something totally different. The moral high ground is another issue all together. It is covered with many minority groups.
It makes a lot of sense Sherwulfe as there is now an Appeal. If due process through the system is to be ignored, why do the antis try it out continuously??? Councils say no to a great many things. It doesn’t make those decisions correct. Some people seem to believe this is not the case, but they should attend a few planning appeals away from oil and gas and find the process is littered with situations where specialist officials are over ruled by councillors without following correct procedures and are then reversed at appeal. I have sat through a two day appeal where the inspector made it pretty clear after 15 minutes that the councils original legal decision had no leg to stand upon. You will find appeals take out the froth that councillors and antis/nimbys try and bring to the table and get down to the real issue. All perfectly legal, but less prone to bias.
I refuse to get into your perpetual ridiculous argument whereby you claim anyone who does not state an opinion either pro or anti fracking must automatically support fracking. My statement re something that is legal may not necessarily be right was aimed at the business of fracking itself. The business may be legal, in England, under this Tory government, but that certainly does not make it right.
CAN ANY PRO-FRACKER
Show ANY UK support for Fracking.
All I see is an endless stream of NO, NO, NO.
Doncaster councillors have voted to oppose any fracking activities that may come to the borough in future.
https://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/this-will-send-a-strong-and-clear-message-to-those-in-power-doncaster-council-vote-to-oppose-fracking-in-the-borough-1-9361595
Doncaster Council, just the latest in a long line of , NO, NO , NO.
We were not discussing right or wrong-that is subjective. We were discussing whether a majority were wanting to make it illegal-that is measurable, and has been measured. As you directed your comment to me Pauline, and I had been discussing the latter with KatT, that is what I have commented upon.
Now, if you want to have a discussion on right and wrong feel free, but it is a different subject. I do think you will find it difficult to find where I might have entered into the right/wrong area but if you need that, I would suggest the Government have decided it is right to check the merits of the process, and have made it legal to do so. Two thirds of those asked did not indicate they were wanting that situation changed. One third did, but two thirds of that one third admitted they knew little about the subject. Not exactly a mandate for change, and that being the case the status quo is what will continue. We are where we are, not where you feel we should be. Market Research confirms the first bit.
Please do not misquote what I post. I have NEVER said those who have not made up their minds support fracking. I have pointed out that they do NOT support the banning of fracking. It is all very simple and the continuous attempts of a few antis to try and conflate that information is just like a big sign stating you know it is a problem but can’t resist drawing attention to it.
Perhaps you need to re-read my post of 6.55pm?
MARTIN PLEASE FOR THE RECORD, let’s clarify this unquestionable fact …..
Nobody and I mean NOBODY wants Fracking apart from a handful of government ministers and several of their Fracking chums….. All of which DON’T LIVE anywhere near proposed fracking sites .. ( They clearly don’t want to put themselves , or their families at any undue risk )
Wherever Fracking is proposed, it faces very strong community opposition. Thats a fact .
Take a LOOK at the PEOPLE protesting.. They aren’t your Swampies or Tree Huggers that some on here have tried to brand them as….. They are your Doctors, Teachers, Nurses , Midwives, Council Workers…… They are decent people, the backbone of this country , tax paying, educated people … VOTERS ……
They are all giving a resounding NO to Fracking.
When you consider that the only way the industry can hobble along against the will of the people is with INJUNCTIONS , you know the games over .
So, for any on here, still blindly following the UK Fracking dream , hoping to make a big killing on their share investments, let me leave you with this one thought to consider.
Wherever fracking is proposed
The communities are strongly against it.
The Councils are strongly against it.
The MPs are strongly against .
Thia doesn’t look like a good investment to me.
In which case, Jack, it would not go to the Council!
Easy way for any applicant to save time and money. Silly gesture politics.
Wasting their time and more importantly people like mines as well. I do wish this lot would get a better hobby other than hindering projects they don’t fully understand.
Will ultimately be a cakewalk to get passed though and I do take satisfaction seeing all their wee faces sad and angered.
Nice to see early activity happening. Doomsday not long away for the antis once first extraction is completed successfully.
‘once first extraction is completed successfully’
Centrica don’t hold on to that suggestion. They have not lent the extra $6 million. Presumably very concerned where their £60 million has gone and asking questions on why sites with unopposed fracking applications and very costly buried seismic monitors have ended up having to be restored.
Probably similar concerns as Total who have sold large percentages of their onshore holdings.
Doomsday…….for investors.