Will Kelly turn a blind eye to environmental damage?

1 February 2007

A damning new report on the latest version of the East of England Plan [1] casts serious doubts on the environmental impact of Government proposals for major expansion in the region, say countryside campaigners CPRE [2].

The report by two firms of independent experts, Land Use Consultants and Levett-Therivel, criticises the official Government sustainability appraisal undertaken by another firm of consultants, ERM, published last December. The whole issue is to be debated by the East of England Regional Assembly this Friday (2 February).

Levett-Therivel had carried out the original ‘sustainability appraisal’ on an early draft of the East of England Plan in November 2004, and concluded that it posed severe environmental threats.

The new Levett-LUC report questions whether the Planning Minister, Meg Munn MP can justify her comments on proposed Government changes to the East of England Plan. These changes were published just before Christmas.

Ms Munn said the changes were ‘in accordance with the principles of sustainable development and that the additional growth and changes to distribution [proposed by the Government] do not give rise to adverse environmental impacts’.

The new Levett-LUC report highlights a number of deficiencies in the ERM assessment, a new sustainability appraisal, which Ms Munn relied on to make this assertion:

• it questions whether the consultants ERM have addressed the issues at anything more than a superficial level;
• it suggests the consultants should have taken into account Government proposals which ‘watered down’ East of England Regional Assembly and the Government Inspector’s Planning Panel recommendations;
• it says the environmental consequences of significantly increasing the level of development close to London should have been considered more fully, including the Government’s proposals on Harlow North.

The Levett-LUC report also criticises ERM’s sustainability appraisal of these Government modifications to the Plan because it makes no attempt to define or quantify any environmental limits for the region.

Yet, argue Levett-LUC, these limits already being reached or exceeded in relation to traffic, water and sewage. The sustainability appraisal also accepts without comment the Government’s plan for massive expansion of Stansted Airport, which is likely to overwhelm any reduction in greenhouse gas emissions which the regional spatial strategy may achieve.

In a letter to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Ruth Kelly MP, CPRE’s East of England Regional Group expresses its concern that a process which is designed to protect the environment is being sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.

The group’s chairman Lawrence Wragg said:

‘Never in the field of environmental planning have so few attempted to hoodwink so many. Clearly the original 2004 sustainability appraisal of the Regional Assembly’s draft Plan was an embarrassment to the Government and thwarted their plans to over-develop our region. This flawed, highly questionable ERM report seems to provide the answers they wanted in the first place.’

NOTES FOR EDITORS

1. The Plan, which will determine the the scale, shape and speed of development in the region to 2021, was originally drawn up by the East of England Regional Assembly and has been subject to a lengthy Examination in Public before an independent Panel who recommended changes. The Government has now recommended further changes, which it is currently consulting on.
2. CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Sir Max Hastings. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen.

---

Press releases, papers and documents published on this page are the intellectual property of an organisation unrelated to Central Lobby. We promote their parliamentary and political campaigning activities as they are subscribers to the Central Lobby service.

As such, Central Lobby does not edit, endorse, or attempt to balance the opinions expressed on this page. The content of press releases and other such types of content are the responsibility of the originating organisation.