Hitachi- from the country that brought the world Fukushima

Hitachi- from the country that brought the world Fukushima
We feel very sad for the people of Japan who want to end nuclear energy whilst a potential new government and big business are desperate for it

No Fukushima at Oldbury

No to Fukushima at Shepperdine!

No to Fukushima at Shepperdine!

Sunday, 23 May 2010

Our initial thoughts on the coalition agreement

These are our initial thoughts about the coalition agreement and we are pursuing answers to these questions from government.

  • "We will abolish the unelected Infrastructure Planning Commission and replace it with an efficient and democratically accountable system that provides a fast-track process for major infrastructure projects. "
  • "We will publish and present to Parliament a simple and consolidated national planning framework covering all forms of development and setting out national economic, environmental and social priorities. "
  • "We will maintain the Green Belt, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and other environmental protections, and create a new designation – similar to SSSIs – to protect green areas of particular importance to local communities. "
Our 1st thoughts - this just leaves us with more questions than answers:
When will they abolish the undemocratic IPC? what is the priority here?
Will this be before they receive the 1st tranche of applications this year?

What do they mean by a "fast track process"?
Will this be fairer to the local communities and give proper opportunity and time for communities to understand these applications and make their views known to the decision makers? ie not relying on the developer to do this for them as in the existing IPC system. We all know how dismissive Horizon are of our genuine concerns why should they care they are a commercial business and are in this for profit just like any other private developer .... the government can not expect Horizon to be impartial on this it is JUST NOT REALISTIC!

Will the concerns of local communities be given proper consideration or will they continue to be over ridden by the so called "nations greater interest" as was proposed by the IPC system?

What will be done about re-dressing the bias created by the millions of pounds that have been spent by the nuclear industry (and doubtless is now and will continue to be spent) lobbying the DECC etc to ensure this process is biased towards consent regardless of the local communities concerns?

How will the government ensure that the local communities can be represented fairly against the millions spent by these nuclear giants on top notch consultants and lawyers in this process?

Who will be in charge of this process the DECC Secretary of State (Chris Huhne) or the Minister of Planning (Greg Clark)? No doubt the nuclear giants will already be lobbying hard with their top notch expensive team for their man, Greg Clark who wants these power stations built even faster than labour did and incidentally never even bothered to respond to our email blogged last month! So how much does he care about this community?
On Energy and Climate Change:
  • "Liberal Democrats have long opposed any new nuclear construction. Conservatives, by contrast, are committed to allowing the replacement of existing nuclear power stations provided that they are subject to the normal planning process for major projects (under a new National Planning Statement), and also provided that they receive no public subsidy."
  • "We will implement a process allowing the Liberal Democrats to maintain their opposition to nuclear power while permitting the Government to bring forward the National Planning Statement for ratification by Parliament so that new nuclear construction becomes possible. This process will involve:
– the Government completing the drafting of a national planning statement and putting it before Parliament;
– specific agreement that a Liberal Democrat spokesperson will speak against the Planning Statement, but that Liberal Democrat MPs will abstain; and
– clarity that this will not be regarded as an issue of confidence."
Nothing new here since last week, so we still have many burning questions including:
What is the priority here?
What is the timeline for the "National Planning Statement"?

Is this to be a re-hash of the biased and undemocratic "National Policy Statements" drafted by DECC under the tainted regime of Brown and Miliband and there close relationships to the nuclear and power industries.

Will the DECC take proper account of the submissions made by this community during the last governments consultation?

How can this community have their say if their MP can not speak on our behalf nor vote against the monstrous proposal for Shepperdine?

How can this be democratic if Lib Dem MPs can not vote against it? Many people voted Lib Dem because they were against any new nuclear construction these voters have now been officially gagged!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Site Meter