Tim Farron has condemned the government decision to allow fracking in national parks and other sensitive areas, protected at Liberal Democrat insistence under the coalition. The change is being made by statutory instrument so that the House of Commons will not be allowed to debate it.
Tim said
The Government’s decision to sneak through a huge change to allow fracking in our National Parks without a proper debate is outrageous. They have shown their true colours and complete lack of regard for protecting some of the most beautifully scenery in the UK and its wildlife.
It is tantamount to vandalism to not recognise that some areas simply must be protected from fracking so they can be enjoyed by future generations.
The Liberal Democrats protected National Parks and important wildlife sites from fracking while in Government, and have consistently taken a cautious approach to fracking. There are some sites where fracking should be banned in all circumstances. Our priority is to make sure this happens and to focus on how Britain can best deliver a low-carbon future to tackle climate change.
The Liberal Democrats protected National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and groundwater source protection zones from fracking while in Government, within the Infrastructure Bill. Now that the Conservatives are on their own, they have reneged on the commitment that was made. In the SI, fracking will be allowed in these places below 1,200m and in the case of SSSIs, at surface level too.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The shame of Liverpool Labour councillors taking their allowances but not turning up to do the work
Should Labour reconsider the Brexit red lines?
Raising a flap about letterboxes
Arriving at one of East Finchley's ghost platforms
Restrained
Chase Park fair photos
cim
FS People
Peter Martin
expats
17 Comments
This Statutory Instrument sounds more like a gagging order, a dictator thing. It is certainly not a Democratic act, more like One Partyism. The countryside is no longer sacred to them. Which Companies will benefit from Fracking, foreign or British.? Who will get the long term jobs? I certainly would not do it under a nuclear power station. How long would it last? Solar wind wave lasts forever.
Bravo
And if it’s too dangerous for national parks, it is also too dangerous for anywhere else. It’s time we stood up for the planet again and changed our policy on fracking to Keep it in the Ground!
http://greenlibdems.org.uk/en/article/2015/1118862/keep-it-in-the-ground-towards-a-zero-carbon-britain-motion-passed-in-two-regions
nigel hunter 15th Dec ’15 – 12:56pm
“This Statutory Instrument sounds more like a gagging order, a dictator thing. It is certainly not a Democratic act, more like One Partyism.”
… and here we have Richard Littlejohn in the Mail [with the second largest circulation in the UK]:
“And nowhere will the new rules be enforced more rigorously than in Britain, where our elected representatives are determined to prove they can ‘lead the world’ in tackling NON – EXISTENT global warming — and to hell with the consequences for the rest of us.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3360272/LITTLEJOHN-says-climate-change-deal-isn-t-worth-paper-s-written-on.html
It is very clear that there are forces in play in the UK that are now far more powerful than the democratic process.
Well said Tim and comments above. I have been saying to anyone listening , for a while , especially when there was daft talk of ditching the Democratic in our party name for Liberal , only, WE SHOULD EMPHASISE LIBERAL AND DEMOCRATIC EQUALLY AND AT ALL TIMES UNTIL OUR UNIQUENESS IS UNDERSTOOD. We are the only party that is both . Liberal and democratic are intrinsic, as is affinity with the natural world . Something Liberals and liberals espoused before any of us were born and before Green parties existed .A read of the great Thoreau , or of various declarations in the formation and history of Liberal International , show it .Again , a timeless cause , irrespective of climate change , Littlejohn take note. Fracking in National Parks is madness even if there is no climate change . The whole environmental debate needs to move on to quality of life issues.
Lorenzo 15th Dec ’15 – 2:13pm
“WE SHOULD EMPHASISE LIBERAL AND DEMOCRATIC EQUALLY AND AT ALL TIMES UNTIL OUR UNIQUENESS IS UNDERSTOOD”
I have raised the issue before, that once a government achieves power – the electorate has no way that it can impact on it until the next GE comes around. I suspect Osborne is no exception, however, it has been particularly noticeable whilst he has held the position of Chancellor that the most unpopular measures are introduced in the early years of an administration and softened and/or ‘give aways’ included in the budgets leading up to the next GE. Unfortunately the electorates memory does seem to be short – for the tactic does seem to work.
I would contend that voters need to hold some threat to the government throughout their tenure – if democracy is to be strengthened as is indicated by the underhand tactics we have seen in play. I believe that Zac Goldsmith’s ‘True Recall’ proposal would do just this.
I am prepared to accept that there may be others schemes that the Party can offer which will strengthen democracy [that are likely to be popular with the voters] – however, that some new safeguards are necessary – are without doubt.
Not aware of the Goldsmith proposal, thanks , John , shall look at that . At every level some more challenging ideas regarding democracy , need to be considered , I think , we would all , in our party , or not , see greater involvement as a good thing . a diversion from the above , but I favour a more democratic justice , as does , to some extent , Simon Hughes.Not directly elected judges , but greater accountability,and involvement by all concerned.
I would like the party to make a MASSIVE issue of this. It is one of the few issues which is: relatively high profile, there is a clear difference in policy between the coalition and the Conservative governments, there is a clear Lib Dem position to take and that position is, I suspect, in tune with majority public opinion. The Government’s approach to fracking is, in my opinion, outrageous, and we need to make this as widely known as we can.
Time for the Lib Dems to stop being ‘ cautious’ and strongly oppose the Conservatives on £racking …. Yes the £ in fracking was deliberate!
I agree with Billy Boulton … it’s time for ‘the party to make a MASSIVE issue’ of the government’s approach to fracking and their intention to ‘sneak through’ changes without proper debate. Once the vandalism of our National Parks and other much loved land starts there will be no stopping the greedy Tories.
I seem to remember an agreement in Paris to try to reduce climate change to no more than another 0.5 deg of planetary warming. Or did I imagine it?
Jenny Barnes 16th Dec ’15 – 9:03am
“I seem to remember an agreement in Paris to try to reduce climate change to no more than another 0.5 deg of planetary warming. Or did I imagine it?”
I did post this article on another thread – but I think it achieves its purpose of explaining how difficult it will be to achieve any of the ‘agreed targets’ – unless work starts straight away:
Climate deal: the pistol has fired, so why aren’t we running?
There can be no complacency after the Paris talks. Hitting even the 1.5C target will need drastic, rapid action
With the climate talks in Paris now over, the world has set itself a serious goal: limit temperature rise to 1.5C. Or failing that, 2C. Hitting those targets is absolutely necessary: even the one-degree rise that we’ve already seen is wreaking havoc on everything from ice caps to ocean chemistry. But meeting it won’t be easy, given that we’re currently on track for between 4C and 5C. Our only hope is to decisively pick up the pace.
In fact, pace is now the key word for climate. Not where we’re going, but how fast we’re going there. Pace – velocity, speed, rate, momentum, tempo. That’s what matters from here on in. We know where we’re going now; no one can doubt that the fossil fuel age has finally begun to wane, and that the sun is now shining on, well, solar. But the question, the only important question, is: how fast….
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/13/paris-climate-talks-15c-marathon-negotiating-physics
Billy Boulton 15th Dec ’15 – 11:33pm
“I would like the party to make a MASSIVE issue of this. It is one of the few issues which is: relatively high profile, there is a clear difference in policy between the coalition and the Conservative governments, there is a clear Lib Dem position to take and that position is, I suspect, in tune with majority public opinion. The Government’s approach to fracking is, in my opinion, outrageous, and we need to make this as widely known as we can.”
I don’t want to be unduly alarmist, but my understanding of TTIP, which is almost certainly going to be agreed and put in place during the lifetime of this parliament, is that if a corporation has made investments in a project and the national government chooses to cancel that project at a later date – the national government can be sued by the corporation – not just for the investment made, but for future anticipated profits.
The Germans, I believe, are currently paying punitive damages by the corporation that built its nuclear reactors – after they decided to abandon nuclear after Fukushima.
I would also think that any measures included in Osborne’s fiscal charter would also provide the potential to sue by any corporation that has a beneficial contract under its auspices. The Chinese planned nuclear reactor and the various steel contracts that have /are being arranged would also fall into this category.
In short, after TTIP is in place – it might prove impossibly expensive to change many of the policies put in place by Osborne/Cameron.
I want Fracking tomorrow, I want HS2 as well. I do not want any prevaricating. National Parks? I understand the exit point for the extraction would be outside the aprk itself. We listen to environmentalists too much, having the moral high ground is one thing but the practical reality of feeding our families, having less dependence on coal and oil etc are much more important. Lets get on with it. I say that living on the edge of a large national trust area where fracking may occur.
theakes: Humanity has already found 5 times the fossil fuel we can safely burn, and there is plenty of gas in Qatar, together with infrastructure to bring it here. Drilling for more in the UK makes no sense if we want to meet our collective climate commitments.
As for HS2, the 50 -70 £billion would provide about £1,000 a head UK wide to build cycling infrastructure – enough for 10 years at more than double the Dutch investment rate. Cycling – real zero emissions transport, reduction in pollution, noxes, congestion; increased population fitness, reduced obesity, and lower impact on the NHS. The politicians should be queueing up.
While we’re at it, it would make sense to increase road fuel duty, with the price heading fo £1 /litre.
And no more runways in the SE, lets spend that money on something sensible, too.
BBC lunchtime news 16 December – well done Tim.
Excellent comments on fracking a good amount of airtime too!
With this and the floods I think Tim is discovering how to make his profile and platform as a constituency MP work for his Party and show how his values and the party’s overall agencda relate to the concerns of his constituents.
This may be the only way to grab airtime from the big boys. Go, Tim (said with moderate enthusiasm).
Jenny, suggest you move the country forward, we cannot stand still, we have stood still long enough, time to bite the bullet. So we have to import from Qatar, I am speechless.
HS2 , 50 – 100 years of benefits. We must not rattle out the old tired cliches which I heard in the 50’s when the motorway program,me was being proposed. Bet all those opposed then have used them since. I cannot wait to get on HS2. Come to think about they were dished out in the 1830’s – 50’s when the railways were being built etc.
We have to move forward.