Antimicrobial resistance and warfare

Bit of a stretch to my usual environmental worries but, related to the current Middle East conflict, this piece on yesterday's Inside Health (starts at 8 mins in) explaining how the widespread distribution of heavy metal fragments from all the munitions being used can supercharge antimicrobial bacterial resistance.  Truly scary stuff!

Water Neutrality - gone down the plug hole?

Following several press releases (and a Guardian leaked comment from Rachel Reeves on 7 Oct) on 31 Oct Natural England (NE) issued a statement to withdraw their Sep ‘21 Position Statement that they could not be sure that abstraction of ground water at Hardham was not harming the Arun valley protected sites. The basis for this withdrawal seems to be a very recent report ‘Hardham Basin Environment Study’ commissioned by Southern Water (which has not been released to HDC) and an agreement between NE, SW, DEFRA, & EA (together with RSPB re changes at Pulborough Brooks) comprising:

• No additional abstraction pressure – Southern Water will volunteer a groundwater abstraction licence reduction from 16 → 13 Ml/d (average over the year) and 30 → 27 Ml/d (peak).

• On-site water level management – RSPB will manage sluices to maintain suitable water depths and prevent further deterioration of site features.
• Monitoring of site features – Southern Water will continue building a scientific baseline of site conditions, providing assurance that the agreed measures are effective.
• Ecological resilience measures– A package of actions (e.g. reprofiling/desilting ditches, removing invasive species) to improve site resilience and ensure the licence complies with the Habitats Regulations.

There is an apparent conflict between this new, and as yet unseen by this author,  HBES report and NE's own report of May this year (Condition review: Arun Valley Sites - Freshwater-dependent features,  Natural England Research Report NERR143) which said of the 'Floodplain sites, Ramsar and SSSIs' that 'The predominant water-dependent habitats; the ditches, wet grassland, swamp and wetland habitats are in Unfavourable Declining condition across all three sites'. 

As the competent authority under the Habitats Regulations, HDC will apply the precautionary principle and will be using the 2024/25 water efficiency savings made by Southern Water to allow all development to move forward as water neutral from 1st November 2025. These savings were previously to be used by the Sussex North Water Certification Scheme (SNWCS) which now won’t be going ahead.

For interest, here's the annual reported leakage data for SW as a whole

and SW's quarterly abstraction from Hardham over the same period

PS: The observant will note that, despite broadly increasing leaks, the Hardham abstraction volume appears to be slowly declining over the last 5 years or so (ever since SW were told by NE that they were abstracting too much).  The answer lies in an additional abstraction point in the Arun, downstream from Hardham, which is used to balance the demand (provided there's enough water coming over the Hardham weir).

'D'-day for 'devolution' - 10 January 2025

This is the date for upper tier authorities (ie unitaries and county councils) to express an interest in joining the government's priority list to become a Strategic Combined Authority.  The outlines are set out in the 16 Dec 2024 white paper on English Devolution.  It's been sold as 'Taking Back Control' (from Whitehall) but I think we've heard that one before, and informed opinion regards it as 'decentralisation', not 'devolution'.

For the people of Sussex this may result in a Mayoral Strategic Combined Authority on top of 3 unitary councils - East Sussex, Brighton & Hove + extra bits, and West Sussex, with no more district councils.  Whilst some combination of the above just might be an improvement, especially if it led to a significant increase in funding for the area (but I'm not holding my breath), if accepted for the priority list, it's likely that this year's West Sussex County Council elections will be cancelled!

This would result in the details of any new local government organisations being negotiated by the existing county councillors.  If, like me, you are not happy with this prospect, then please write by 9th January to Jim McMahon, the Minister of State for Local Government and English Devolution, using this handy template (from Horsham Green Party) and demand local accountability! 

Horsham District's Reg.19 Local Plan - On The Rocks or Awaiting New Orders?

After just 3 days of hearings, which started on the 10 December 2024, the Planning Inspector suspended the hearings, which were due to continue until late January 2025 because he had 'significant concerns about the soundness and legal compliance of the Plan in respect of a number of areas'.  To say that this was unexpected is an understatement, as the Inspector had had plenty of time to raise any worries in a pre-examination, but none was requested.  

There is a response to the above decision from HDC, which supposes that the Inspector's main concerns were:

Meeting housing needs and the Sustainability Appraisal (“SA”);

Whether the Council has discharged its Duty to Cooperate;

The purported 6 month time limit in relation to delay in the examination of local plans.

and suggested a way forward with regards to the first two points.  However nothing has been forthcoming from the Inspector, and the Christmas and New Year break has intervened.

Given the level of opposition to the Reg.19 Local Plan in certain quarters, why does this matter?  The short answer is found in the question 'should the district have a degree of control over what, where and how new development takes place, and receive contributions to build commensurate infrastructure?'  My view is most definitely 'yes', especially considering the alternative 'Planning by Appeal' under the latest National Planning Policy Framework, which would require Horsham District to allow the building of between 1500 and 1800 new dwellings each year!  (The Reg.19 HDLP plans for an average of 777 new dwellings each year.)  

Given the District's current lack of a 5-year housing land supply, we are already seeing such speculative planning applications coming forward, not to mention winning at appeal , and further delays to the plan will only aggravate this. 

There is also the looming question of central government's plans for so called 'devolution'; but that's for another blog post!  In the meantime, this councillor hopes that Inspector Luke Fleming had a Merry Christmas, and wishes him a Happy New Year!

Development proposals at Glebe Farm, Steyning 

It seems from recent public meetings that our MP (Andrew Griffith) is being somewhat economical with the truth regarding Horsham's Local Plan Reg.19 submission.

The following is the position of the local Green group district councillors.

At a meeting at the Steyning Centre on 11th April 2024, Andrew Griffith MP suggested that residents ask their District Councillors how they voted on the Local Plan (Dec 23):

• Mr Griffith knows that voting in council meetings is a matter of public record.

• The Local Plan includes Glebe Farm (DC/21/2233 Land North of Glebe Farm and Kings Barn Lane).

• The individual councillor details are easily gleaned from the Horsham District Council (HDC) website or the YouTube video recording of the meeting. 

• At the meeting, Mr Griffith also suggested that it was unfortunate that the Glebe Farm site had been included in the HDC Local Plan and that it was ‘...rejected in the previous plan...’.  This is not the case: In fact, the proposed development at Glebe Farm (‘at least 240 homes’) was included in the previous iteration of the Local Plan (July 21 Regulation 19 consultation) which was agreed and promoted by the Conservative Cabinet (Public Pack) Agenda Document for Cabinet, 15/07/2021 17:30 (moderngov.co.uk)

It is disingenuous of Mr Griffith to criticise HDC planning for the current Local Plan, which is necessary to meet housing target requirements mandated by central Conservative government law.  

As required by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the Standard Methodology calculation for Horsham District demands 911 dwellings/annum across the Horsham District(this is equivalent to 15,487 homes in the 17-year period 2023-2040) yet HDC’s evidence base work has identified a total of 13,212 homes and associated infrastructure which are considered to be deliverable in the Local Plan (an average of 777 homes/year to be delivered in a stepped-wise way) – that’s 2,275 fewer dwellings in all.

Why do we need a local plan anyway?

If the Local Plan does not try to meet central government’s demands, it will be rejected by the Planning Inspectorate – leading to a free-for-all for developers. You may have noticed, with dismay, the numbers of new builds around Fontwell and Barnham. It is important to know this is because Arun District Council still has no Local Plan in place – something Andrew Griffiths has highlighted as a failing of that Council at a meeting in Arun only a few weeks back - which is quite an irony considering he is now saying he’s against Horsham’s Local Plan.  Minutes from Barnham & Eastergate Parish Council meeting 12 March 2024 say: “10.4 Andrew Griffith MP Meeting – The Chair [...] in particular was pleased to hear him say he would tell Arun to sort out their Local Plan.”  https://barnhamandeastergate-pc.gov.uk/media/15179/draft-bepc-minutes-12-03-24.pdf

How did the Greens vote? And would voting against the local plan have made a difference?

Six Greens voted for the draft Local Plan on 11 th December 2023, on the basis that it was better than the current ’planning free-for all’, and two abstained, but only after Greens having gained several improvements in areas such as sustainability, active travel and affordability.

Green decided to work with the Lib Dems in a constructive way, for the best outcome for the residents throughout the District.

The Lib Dems are now the majority party at HDC (28 in Dec, now 27) so they did not require additional votes from the minority/opposition groups to get the Local Plan approved (Cons then 11, now 12, Greens then 8 now 9).

The current Local Plan is very similar to the previous version devised by the Conservatives, with a few significant removals in the shape of large sites at Adversane and Buck Barn.

Any significant changes to the Local Plan might have cost hundreds of thousands of pounds and taken many years – during which time 1000s more houses could have been built speculatively - to lower standards and without any control over location from the Council - which would also have to relinquish influence on the provision of supporting infrastructure – just like in Arun District.

When voting, councillors were doing so for the District, not individual wards. This does not mean that when voting Greens were happy with all elements.

Horsham Planning Committees will be able to scrutinise the details of developments on a one-by-one basis, to ensure that they align with the Climate Action and Supplementary Design Strategies to improve the quality of developments.

Local councillors may be contacted via email at:

Cllr Mike Croker (Bramber, Upper Beeding & Woodmancote: Mike.Croker@Horsham.gov.uk

Cllr Victoria Finnegan (Steyning & Ashurst): Victoria.Finnegan@Horsham.gov.uk

Cllr Nick Marks (Steyning & Ashurst): Nicholas.Marks@Horsham.gov.uk 

And then there were nine!

Pleased to say that there are now nine Green Party councillors on Horsham District Council following the byelection victory of Gill Perry, who is an active Parish councillor in Henfield.  (The byelection was brought about by the untimely death of the previous independent incumbent, Malcolm Eastwood.)

I look forward to Gill's green contributions to the District over the next 3 years, and hopefully more!

The deed is done!

Finally, after 5 years work spanning all the time I've been a district councillor, on 11 December HDC finally agreed a Regulation 19 Local Plan for consultation and subsequent submission to the Planning Inspectorate.  As I said in the meeting (around 5hrs 20min), no plan is perfect, but should be the best in current circumstances.

It is now up to the Planning Inspectorate to weight up the plan and all its supporting documents, along with the comments from the public consultation (which closes on 1 March 2024): with a bit of luck and a fair wind we might have a made plan by mid-2025.  What could possibly go wrong?

No 20 mph limit for Steyning?

This FB post by our county councillor is potentially (ie until the next County elections in 2025) the end of community ambitions for a 20 mph speed limit across the residential and commercial areas of Steyning and the Maudlin area of Bramber.  (The historic area of Bramber and the vast majority of Upper Beeding already has a 20 mph speed limit.)

It might be worth examining the last paragraph of that FB post, viz: 'My view was that residents' had to have their say on the matter, and I hope those who did not get what were hoping for with this proposal, will acknowledge that a democratic process has been followed...'  It has been estimated, in the absence of any hard data, that less than 200 residents responded to Cllr Linehan's survey (which was promoted by the Conservative Party, and asked for your name, address and likely voting intensions).  The 2021 residents survey, promoted by a non-political community working party and supported by both Steyning and Bramber parish councils, raised 1511 responses (with checks carried out to confirm results were not being skewed by individuals making multiple responses) and resulted in a just under 2:1 majority for an area wide scheme.

This begs the question: which was more democratic?  

Global Temperature Anomaly

Don't wish to scare anyone, but if you take the data from the recent JA-55 temperature anomaly graph for 2023

and curve fit with an exponential, you get a pretty good fit and an exceedingly worrying prediction!

HDC finally declares a climate and ecological emergency

At its first full working council meeting on 21 June 2023, HDC finally accepted that there is a Climate and Ecological Emergency (at 55 minutes in, despite the vocal protestations from the Tory opposition)!  Evidence for my 'not fast enough' view comes from Climate Emergency UK's scorecard for Horsham District - we should have done better.

As I said in May, we hear what the new administration is saying, now for the hard bit...

Doesn't time fly when you're having fun?

Or in this case, canvassing!  Seems to have worked though, as we now have two new councillors in Steyning and Ashurst ward, so three in total in the Bramber Castle county division.  This 'gang of three' is now part of an 8 member Green group on Horsham DC (joining Joan, Claudia and Emma in Storrington & Washington ward, with Len and Jon in Pulborough, Coldwaltham & Amberley).

How things have changed since 2019 when Bob & I first journeyed to Horsham for our first council meeting!  The balance of power is now firmly with the LibDems (28 of the 48 seats) and it was a pleasure to hear the new leader saying that tackling the joint challenges of the Climate Emergency and associated Biodiversity Crisis will be an immediate priority, and an 'ever present consideration in all that we do'.  Words that he will be held to in the months and years to come.

A decade of green growth?

As a counterpoint to some of my gloomier posts, I was given a pictorial reminder yesterday of just how keenly nature is intent on undoing mankind's infrastructure.

The context was cutting back a roadside fallen dead tree (previously it had just been cut back to the edge of the tarmac following its demise), and its accompanying shrubbery (mostly privet and brambles).  

As work progressed I noticed an upright metal pole appearing out of the depths, and then another:

Eventually the penny dropped and I realised I was looking at a ex-road sign from a decade ago - the actual metal sign having been liberated, presumably when it fell off the posts.
  

There is, of course, a political aspect to this, as WSCC are responsible for this land, as part of the public highway, and Highways revenue budget has been more than halved in real terms over the last decade (it might have picked up a little very recently).  You get what you pay for (and I didn't mention potholes once).

Local Plan stumbles again!

This time it's political: from an HDC press release dated Tuesday 10 January 2023:

Senior councillors of Horsham District Council have voted to pause the development of the Horsham District Local Plan until later this year. The planned meetings of Cabinet and full Council on 18 January 2023 have therefore been cancelled.

The Plan, which was set to go to a Regulation 19 consultation in February 2023 sets out how the District will deliver the required number of homes in a sustainable way, supporting the requirements to be water neutral and the delivery of community infrastructures, transport links and opportunities for local employment.

This translates as 'the Tory majority group got together and decided that, in the face of increasing verbal opposition from some of their supporters, it would make their chances at the upcoming May elections less dire if the plan were delayed for the new administration to sort out'.  I appreciate the irony of my commenting in this way, having proposed a delay in June 2021 (to see what the post pandemic environment would be like), but I think we have a much better idea now, and water neutrality will restrain development for the next few years, so a plan would be better than no plan?

A further twist emerged on Tuesday in a message from HDC's chief exec:

'I have today received a letter of resignation from Councillor Jonathan Chowen from his role as leader of the Council with immediate effect.  Councillor Tony Hogben, as Deputy Leader, will act as Leader until full Council is able to appoint a new Leader at its next meeting.'  

Which made for an interesting week, and it's only Thursday!  (It's almost as if the local Tories are trying to outdo the national party, in that the next incumbent will be the fourth Leader in as many years!) 

Back to the 'decision to delay' made by 'senior councillors'.  It doesn't strike me as very democratic, in that the debate was behind closed doors.  There has been a second press release sent to the WS County Times, but again that's not been made public (until WSCT's next edition).  I suppose I'm being naïve (undoubtedly I am, politically) but, regardless of the Tory group vote, a documented decision at a cabinet meeting (maybe the one planned for 18 January?) would have made the decision accountable in a formal way.  

Passivhaus for Scotland

 This could be big!  How refreshing to see a government with some foresight.

To plan, or not to plan? That is the question.

As noted in earlier blog pieces, Horsham District's revised local plan (the Horsham District Local Plan 2022 – 39) Regulation 19 submission is edging closer towards public scrutiny.  Were it not for the intervention from the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities intervention on 5 & 6th December, the plan would have been published in the papers for cabinet on 15 December, where it was expected to be be approved, coming to full council on 11 January 2023.

However, all that we have for now is a statement from the council leader in response to a question that I asked at full council on 14 December (starts at 2h 01m in).  As the leader said in his response to my follow up question, decisions will be made in January 2023, so it's make your mind up time!  

On balance, for the reasons the leader stated, I think it is important to get a plan in place, especially as the Water Neutrality problem will significantly reduce planned housing numbers compared with those mandated by central government's Standard Methodology.  Whilst the drafts I have seen are, to my taste, not tough enough with regard to housing build standards (relying too much on central government methodology) and sustainable travel provision, I believe that there is enough there to work with and take forward. 

Water Neutrality Update

The long awaited 'Sussex North Water Neutrality Study: Part C – Mitigation Strategy' was published today.  Amongst much discussion around how not to make things worse, and mostly ignoring the points raised in my earlier blog, there are some interesting insights in this report.  

Firstly, concerning the likely housing growth in Horsham District, the report estimates 12,800 new dwellings over the period to 2039, with initial growth being below average.  This compares with the previous 19,860 over a similar 18 year time span (cabinet, July 2021) ie a reduction of 1/3 compared with central government's 'Standard Method'.  Will this be 'Planning Inspector' proof?

Secondly, the report identifies the need for an LPA-led Offsetting Scheme that 'will require an operating body that will administer it, collect funding, pay offset providers and monitor results'.  What teeth, if any, will it have?

More wrangling to come, I suspect...

Just have a think!

Whilst I and all the other Horsham District councillors contemplate the oncoming revised Regulation 19 local plan (in the cabinet papers for its 15 December 2022 meeting), I'll just leave you with a clear post-Cop27 summary of the mess we are in.  Not a pretty sight is it, but there is still a glimmer of hope.

The relentless rise of atmospheric CO2

Easy to get diverted by all the Tory shenanigans, but this is what really matters:

"Atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide are now comparable to where they were during the mid-Pliocene epoch, around 4.3 million years ago. During that period, sea level was about 75 feet higher than today, the average temperature was 7 degrees Fahrenheit higher than in pre-industrial times, and studies indicate large forests occupied areas of the Arctic that are now tundra."

And the rate of carbon dioxide release is accelerating...

How high above sea level do you live?

PS: did I mention methane?

 

In the sh..

The usual question is 'how deep?'  Whilst that can be difficult to answer, especially on a tidal river like the Adur, 'for how long?', insofar as 'stormwater' overflows are concerned, is much easier now thanks to the Rivers Trust (for its graphics based data presentation).  The Environment Agency has also improved its public data interface, showing just what was in the river when sampled: even more detail is available from the EA, but this much info tells you a lot!

As can be seen at a recent HDC meeting (at 1h17m), the cabinet member for Planning and Development was sticking to the 'we can't control such discharges' line, although recent legal advice to Lewes District would suggest otherwise to some extent.  Can some suitable words be levered into HDC's revised local plan?

'Predict and Provide' or 'Vision and Validate'

For many decades, UK transport planning has been based on the Predict (the new motor traffic growth) and Provide (the calculated new and improved roads and junctions) principle.  Not for any valid reason, just 'that's the way it's always been done'.  Mercifully, this is beginning to change, and rather than cutting and pasting from better authors, can I suggest a read of this opinion piece.

This is all very relevant to Horsham District, as the long awaited Local Plan should appear this coming November (Water Neutrality permitting) and it would make sense, given all the challenges ahead, to ensure that any strategic (ie significantly large) new housing developments have the vision to prioritise sustainable transport modes, rather than buckling under yet more private motor vehicles.

The snag, from a district councillor's viewpoint, being that WSCC Highways are a statutory consultee and, so far, their attitude to such matters is distinctly 'institutionally motorist'.  However, in the beginning it's a developer's site, and with encouragement, which ought to be in the new local plan, then sustainable transport routes should be prioritised.  A local test will be the potential Glebe Farm site east of the Steyning by-pass (for up to 265 dwellings, DC/21/2233).  Well within a 20 minute walk / 5 minute cycle ride to Steyning shops, but will it be easy and comfortable or difficult and dangerous?