Monday 21 June 2010

Letter to Cornishman, published 17th June.

So, we all look on as the clash of the Titans begins and Sainsbury's, Tesco and British International Helicopters square up to each other in an exercise to either protect their assets (Tesco,) expand their assets (Sainsbury's) or strip their assets (BIH.) This month’s minutes from Penzance Chamber of Commerce states that Tesco have purchased Ponsandane field and are submitting a planning application by August 10 to extend the store to double its size, prior to Sainsbury submitting their plans, by September 10.

Sadly, I have seen no evidence from any of them, that they have considered the consequences their actions will have on Penwith’s greatest asset, its natural beauty. When considering the Sainsbury planning application, will the authorities recognise the tragic knock on effect that a relocation of the heliport to Land’s End might have, if they allow it? If BIH fly from Land’s End Aerodrome, our designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (including Whitesand Bay, its coastal path and surrounding countryside,) will be severely challenged by an 100 percent increase in air traffic, and the subsequent noise and emissions from low flying helicopters landing and taking off. Road traffic will reach dangerous levels. Perhaps, planning objections featuring this environmental trauma will fail to fit into the neatly defined criteria required by the authorities. If this is so, who will champion our AONB in the face of such a strong line up?

The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 Part 1V - section 85 states that ’relevant authorities’ will have a regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the AONB: areas that have been designated the highest status of protection in relation to their landscape and scenic beauty. Under the Act, parish councils, town councils and county councils are ‘relevant authorities.’

BIH are currently negotiating their relocation and Tesco and Sainsbury's preparing their planning applications. I hope and expect that our councils will uphold their statutory duties, by entering negotiations on behalf of the AONB. These should include, at the very least, the process of ‘scoping,’ to determine the content and extent of matters that should be submitted to the authorities for projects which are subject to an environmental impact assessment.
If not, then poor guardianship could be responsible for despoliation of one of OUR most precious assets.

Caroline Passingham

Saturday 12 June 2010

LETTER TO CORNISHMAN 4TH JUNE

This week Cornwall County Council announced the loss of over 60 jobs in Waste Management Services; the first of many casualties to come.

According to the Television News Cornwall County Council has got to save over £100 million during the next five years, so here's a free gift to help them on their way.

The Route Partnership plan for the Isles of Scilly service is going to cost about £68 million [has anyone ever seen one of these projects come in on budget?] plus financing. I don't know what interest rates Cornwall County Council pay but an average of 5% seems a reasonable guess. At that, the interest will add about £3.4 million a year for the life of the project [20 years?] but over the first five years alone about £17 million. That seems a lot of money to provide inadequate support for half a percent of Cornwall's population.

The reason, apparently, for spending this huge sum, which on its own will increase the County debt by over 10%, is to obtain an EU grant of £20 million. So the cost over the full five years will be around £65million, after they've got the £20million back.

Now here's a thing. If CCC had adopted the Trythall Shipping proposal, over the same five years it would have cost £16million-£18million plus , say £850k per year in interest. That is £4.5 million over five years. So the Trythall five year cost would seem to be around £22 million.

For that we'd get a faster, smoother service, giving a Penzance to Scillys crossing time that would be only fifteen minutes longer than the time it will take to fly from Lands End Aerodrome by Skybus or BIH when the summer road journey's added in. And, at the end of the period, we'd own a ship that would have a marketable value rather than a seasick making white elephant that is apparently only suitable for the Scillys service so will have no residual value other than as scrap.

That, as far I can see, will save us; the Cornwall County Council taxpayers, a minimum of £44million, protect Penzance harbour, and secure a fast crossing to the Scillys on 99% of the sailing days against about 86% flying days from Lands End aerodrome; a guaranteed more reliable service, and no major harbour works in Penzance.

So there you are. Nearly half the required £100 million savings we have to find and a better technical solution. If CCC don't want to save it all they could use some {£10 million?] to purchase the heliport and lease it back to BIH. That way BIH will survive a little longer and at the end of the day the County may have purchased an appreciating asset to sell on if BIH close.

Good answers don't have to be complicated. They just have to make sense.

Isn't it about time Cornwall County Council's representatives and senior management started taking up their responsibilities to its tax payers, electorate and employees and not worry about saving face by having to change their minds. Savings of this order could save hundreds of jobs, help protect vital services and protect the Scillys link if and when BIH closes.

Please note that I have no interest in Trythall shipping other than appreciating the logic of their proposals which I have seen confirmed by the apparently very accurate quotations and costings that Mr Cartwright has been able to assemble. I am, however, happy to declare an interest in how CCC spend or waste my Council tax and protect our environment and vital services.

Tony White
Chairman . Lands End Aerodrome Action Group.