Messing with Hydroelectric Projects
The Pershore Debacle
Some people have been saying why are we whining? As I have said before - it's not just us - other people have been cheated and in one case terminally disadvantaged by the actions of "the regulator." (The Small Hydro Company)
SEPEL - a prominent small hydro outfit (Good enough for The Queen) applied for a licence at Pershore in Warwickshire on behalf of the Avon Navigation Trust (ANT Website) and were subjected to the same old game that resulted in us "going legal" at Avoncliff - i.e. they applied first and were subject to delays and a second application was made (by the same agent / company who applied second at Avoncliff and identical EA staff "dealt" with the application) which was promoted over SEPEL's application by means of delay, arbitrary action and "gaming" the statutory procedures.
I won't comment on the SEPEL scheme in detail beyond saying that not only did the EA cheat SEPEL's client out of a licenece - the licence that the EA awarded was thrown out as inappropriate by the local planning authority! (We understand it was the Kaplan turbine that the planners refused - now where have we seen that before?)
An examination of the EA's policy acrobatics
some might say disorientated contortions...
David DeChambeau's submission to the Planning Inspectorate
some might say disorientated contortions...
David DeChambeau's submission to the Planning Inspectorate
The matter went to H.M. Planning Inspectorate - who were powerless to act since the unlawful awarding of a licence can't be reversed by a Planning Inspector... (It has to go to Judicial Review) and the EA knew that which is why they unlawfully awarded a licence... See The Evesham Journal
So - to recap - the EA administratively "gamed", lied, egregiously delayed (the EA even claimed to have "misplaced" the paperwork!) and then finally - the arbitrarily selected "winning" application - which shouldn't have been accepted in the first place - gets kicked out by local planners? (Who now appear to have given up and gone along with the EA...)
At the risk of boring you all rigid with whining - repeat - there are questions the EA should be forced to answer about the actions of their officials.
And then... there's the matter of The Canal and River Trust and The Small Hydro Company and that scheme.... detailed in a British Waterways press release which has been the subject of an interesting FoI
The same officers favour the same consultants and then make up a new policy to fit the situation.
ReplyDeleteVery creative.
Yup, change the supposed rules after the game has started - or just blatantly do whatever you feel like doing because there's nobody to stop you and you have access to the public's deep pockets and think you can keep going indefinitely.
DeleteThat relationship is a real puzzle and one has to think that the same people with the same outcome is about as likely as winning Lotto jackpot two weeks on the trot.
The question still remains - why?