This has been an eventful week for environmental issues at four levels – international, national, city and parish – of relevance to Canterbury and Bridge. And unfortunately none of it is good news. In different ways all the developments illustrate the problems that can arise when those with power act to exclude the public and their rights. Let’s start with the international news story, and then scale down to parish level.

International: At the start of the week it was reported that Britain is flouting its international obligations on air quality. In a report to the United Nations Human Rights Council, special rapporteur Baskut Tuncak slammed the UK’s record on air pollution, which causes an estimated 40,000 premature deaths in the UK every year. Tuncak stated that “Air pollution continues to plague the UK. I am alarmed that despite repeated judicial instruction, the UK government continues to flout its duty to ensure adequate air quality and protect the rights to life and health of its citizens. It has violated its obligations”.¹

National: It might have been hoped that international censure on the country’s abysmal pollution record from the United Nations would guide Mr Justice Dove as he finished his judgement on the case brought against the Mountfield development. The case – Shirley & Rundell vs. Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government – challenged the proposed development on air pollution grounds. However, today ConserveBridge has learned the disappointing news that judgement has been handed down in favour of the government. Mr Dove’s reasons for judging as legal a housing development that the evidence indicates will lead to illegal levels of air pollution are not clear. Many thanks to Emily Shirley of Bridge for her hard work in bringing this case.

City: Plans have been unveiled for development on the Kingsmead recreation ground. A group of concerned citizens campaigned to save this open space from development by trying to register the land as a village green in 2013 under the Commons Act, 2006. The attempt failed, in part due to amendments to the Commons Act made by the Growth and Infrastructure Act, 2013. This includes a list of “trigger events” that can be used to prevent land being granted village green status, one of which is an application for planning permission.² So the moment a developer applies for planning permission on an area of land it becomes too late for communities to claim the land as a common. Some might argue that the plans for Kingsmead – which include restaurants, homes and a cinema – will enhance the life of Canterbury. But who would disagree that the Growth and Infrastructure Act is a cynical piece of legislation expressly designed to load the planning system in favour of developers and against communities?

Parish: Deliberations on the Bridge Neighbourhood Plan took an alarming turn at the Bridge Parish Council meeting held on 16 September. Members of the public were asked to leave the meeting on the basis that the planning matter to be discussed related to confidentiality. A parish council is within its rights to withhold from the public information on the grounds of confidentiality unless there is “set against this, a very strong reason in the public interest why it should nevertheless be disclosed”.³

Here ConserveBridge would like to make the following points. We accept that there may be grounds for keeping discussions confidential, but only for a limited period of time and on an exceptional basis. The Bridge Neighbourhood Plan is a process in which all members of the community have an interest. Acting in secret did not serve this community well earlier in the neighbourhood plan process, as became clear earlier this year when an unauthorised approach for an amendment to the Green Gap was made to Canterbury City Council. There is a clear public interest in ensuring that all deliberations are transparent and open. We therefore call upon the Parish Council to make all information available to the public as soon as possible.

References

1. Carrington, Damian (2017) “UN: Britain is flouting duty on pollution”, Guardian, 11 September, p.1 & 4. Also available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/10/uk-flouting-duty-to-cut-air-pollution-deaths-says-un-human-rights-report
2. Growth and Infrastructure Act, 2013, 16(1)(6) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/27/section/16/enacted
3. See: National Audit Office (2017) Local authority accounts: A guide to your rights, p.8. https://www.nao.org.uk/code-audit-practice/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2015/03/Council-accounts-a-guide-to-your-rights.pdf This guide relates to accounts, but gives a good indication of when the claim to commercial confidentiality can be invoked.