[Jonathan Cowap:] A very good morning to you. Jonathan Cowap with the final hour of Tuesday morning's breakfast programme your opportunity to have your say on just about everything as long as it's legal and decent and honest and in your own opinion you can call me now on York six four one six four one. Things we think you might be interested or I think you might be interested in talking about this morning. Erm Gascoigne Woods this er this great big erm dump of of coal waste that's gonna be er left in the Selby area a mile long consisting of millions of tons of of spoil from the tip. Local people very angry about it, how do you feel on the subject? O nine O four six four one six four one. We're gonna to be speaking to one or two er expert voices or er deeply interested parties in a moment or twos time. Your contribution is more than welcome York six four one six four one. Quick call that's all it will take and then er we ring you back and bear the burden of the telephone bill. Erm life imprisonment should no longer be the automatic penalty for murder, that's according to the committee chaired by the former er Lord er er former Lord Chief Justice Lord Lane. It says it's wrong that a judge should have to pass the same sentence on an abused wife who kills a brutal husband as it does on a robber armed with a shotgun who kills in cold blood. The committee recommends that life should remain the maximum sentence but the judges should be given the freedom to impose, Whatever penalty they see fit. Can you agree with that? That life imprisonment should no longer be the automatic penalty for murder and that judges should be free to impose whatever penalty they seem fit. Your thoughts on that one would be interesting. Erm the Sun claims this morning that the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr George Carey believes that the Prince of Wales should not be allowed to become the King of England because of his friendship with Camilla Parker Bowles. Do you this that's fair? Six four one six four one is the number to call and erm the whole business about er these people Lloyds of London, you know the er the investors the names at Lloyds who stake everything they have in order to rake in enormous profits. Well they had a particularly bad time many of them lost absolutely everything and now they're protesting cos the Lloyds people are only coming up with a nine hundred million pound rescue package that might give them some of them back half of what they invested. Can you work up any sympathy for them? O nine O four six four one six four one and perhaps on a lighter note according to speculation in the Yorkshire Post newspaper this morning Gazzer could be heading towards Alan Rhodes. The paper says Paul Gascoigne could be coming to Leeds United after his career in Italian football where he plays of course for Lazio the Rome based club. Erm I stress it is just speculation but what do you think? Is Gazzer just what Leeds United needs or even wants? York six four one six four one is the number to call. Could we bear to see him weeping across the border there in West Yorkshire? It's ten minutes past nine and joining us on the line this morning is er Judy in York good morning Judy.
[Judy:] Good morning Jonathan.
[Jonathan Cowap:] We were talking on the subject of erm divorce in in yesterday morning's programme and this idea that erm the the whole procedure of getting a divorce som er would be speeded up and there'd be something called, No faults divorce, so that people wouldn't have to point accusatory fingers at one another. What was your erm wha what was your opinion of of these new suggestions?
[Judy:] Right well erm I I believe er that we should make every effort to preserve marriages erm and thinking especially of the suffering that's involved fm for children. I really feel very much for the children. And I'd I do think it's possible erm with help for people both sides have a partnership to to change you know if we take an honest look at ourselves. They'd start er you know one man gen mentioned er that when we get married in church erm we are making sacred vows you know we start with God but then we get busy with our living and our jobs and having our families and then somehow we forget about God [LAUGHTER] and [] we we try to go on without him. But er I I do belie I've we we go to a a church in in York and er I believe in the saying, The family that prays together stays together, and a christian foundation for marriage i gives stability in your relationship. I mean we have to work very hard in our own er relationship we've had our ups and downs we've gone through many difficult times like unemployment and even homelessness and [LAUGHTER] you know we we've gone through it but when you make your promises you say you'll stay together for richer for poorer in sickness and in health and so on. But sometimes they're taking lightly and we have found the help and encouragement that our christian friends and our our vicar have given to us in our difficult times have he helped keep us together. I'm sure the word divorce has come into my mind er several times at the crisis points but by God's strength you keep going and you grow.
[Jonathan Cowap:] But f f f for many people Judy I mean th people will look to you with some degree of er of admiration and maybe some degree of of envy that you do have that strong faith that's that's helped you through those times. But for many people isn't it the case that the the church wedding is an an and the promises made the vows made before God and er before the the congregation, for many people they're just a sort of rather erm oh dear how can I put it rather a flimsy frippery erm that they just feel it's essential to have so that they can have the nice pictures and and look back on on a church wedding. Doesn't it make a nonsense of the whole thing?
[Judy:] Well I agree I I mean it it is a bit hypocritical really just to want all all the the show and everything you know if you're not really sincere in those promises you're making. I mean the the money that some people spend on on a wedding i I mean it it's just one day and then you got yo it's your life afterwards that really counts. Erm I think money is another issue a actually very strong issue that causes er people to think of divorce because of disagreement of h how to to use money people go into debt. We're coming up to [LAUGHTER] Christmas of course and that was touched on yesterday how much people spend at Christmas. Erm there's tremendous pressures I think for for a mother particularly erm at the early stage in the marriage when she has young children at home. I found that quite a hard time erm and especially if you don't have any family near. M my parents live quite a long way away and erm y you've got to to you need the support of others. A friend and I in in our church we've started erm a mother and toddler service and that seemed to really help a lot of the young mums they really look forward and they said could we have it more often. You know we had it once a month and they really wanted this kind of support and help and er for the ch children to have a christian foundation. I'm sure if people will perhaps they look at the church and think oh it's out of touch but it isn't there are churches that are alive and have something very relevant to say today.
[Jonathan Cowap:] As a as a churchgoer and a committed christian I mean I I quoted earlier on this morning from the Sun newspaper this morning which is ranting and raving this morning on the subject of erm well it claims that the the Archbishop of Canterbury er Dr Carey is saying that erm Charles could never be king of this country erm because erm he had an affair with Camilla Parker Bowles
[Judy:] Mhm.
[Jonathan Cowap:] wha what's what would your opinion be as as a church-comer would you be as we don't know whether the Archbishop really said it cos it's printed in the Sun for heaven's sake.
[Judy:] Mm I bet it's been twisted I've had [LAUGHTER] experience of things I've said being in the paper and not coming out as I've said them [].
[Jonathan Cowap:] But wha what's y what's your opinis opinion I mean you're talking about erm the er marriage from er er er spiritual standpoint from a christian standpoint and here we have the man who erm if he became king would be head of the Church of England assuming it hasn't become disestablished by then.
[Judy:] Mm.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Erm how would you feel about him being being the kind and defender of the faith?
[Judy:] Well not very happy really. Erm you know I mean i i wi the Queen I think has given a wonderful example and her family life and I feel very sorry for the way her her children have you know the stresses of modern life ha have caused all these things and I feel for Charles an and Diana deeply. Erm I think it's really very sad that i it's just the society we live in has put these kind of pressures on marriages and you know we're all human and we can all be tempted to look at other people and be unfaithful but in those times of er you know temptation you just I well I I've found that that's where my faith comes in you're sort of helped through those times. Erm I'm not really ans answering the question but I I didn't really want [LAUGHTER] to get on to that one it's just []
[Jonathan Cowap:] All right.
[Judy:] Could I just erm mention one thing if
[Jonathan Cowap:] Yep
[Judy:] if there are people who are going through a crisis just now there is a wonderful organization called Care, Care for the family. They have many caring initiatives and erm they've been to York and they've erm had marriage seminars er and they do an hel help with parenting er I just wonder if I could give the address of this so if anyone is interested
[Jonathan Cowap:] Well
[Judy:] they could get in touch
[Jonathan Cowap:] I'll tell you I'll tell you what w we you give the the the address to someone o off air because people won't have pen and paper now and then if any
[Judy:] Right and then anyone can phone in
[Jonathan Cowap:] then anyone who wants it can call us. Thanks Judy.
[Judy:] Okay.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Bye bye now have a good day bye bye.
[Judy:] Bye bye thank you.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Bye bye. Erm here's a here's something from the Sun this morning just on the subject of who's going to be king. Erm bookies yesterday slashed odds on Prince William becoming the next king because of an exclusive Sun story, I don't think. Erm, We revealed the Queen wants the crown to skip a generation. William Hill, the other William, immediately cut their price on Wills being crowned by January the first in the year two thousand from twenty five to one to ten to one. Not such good odds. Do you think the crown ought to skip a generation like that? O nine of four six four one six four one if you'd like to comment on something in the news at the moment something on er Judy's just said or er on this business of of life imprisonment, No longer to be the automatic penalty for murder judges to be given the freedom to impose whatever penalty they see fit. Would you trust the judiciary of this country with that sort of er level of responsibility? People are already querying from time to time the de decision judges make. I can't begin to imagine the sort of furore that might break out if er judges started to hand out the sort of penalties that they saw fit in particular cases. And er you might have heard what er the Department of Education, John Patten the Education Secretary, was saying yesterday about erm sex education. I've got all the er the official details in in front of me here. In a statement Mr Patten set out the place of sex education in society and the vital importance of teaching the teaching of moral values. He called for concerted action by governors head teachers and teachers to erm make sure that er young people appreciate the importance of having a set of values recognize the values held by others from whom they can learn. This whole business of sex education and teaching morality in schools, do you think it is the school's responsibility or do you think mum and dad ought to play more of a part? York six four one six four one is the number to call. Erm moving on and talking about the subject of the Gascoigne Wood pits or the er proposed tip at the Gascoigne Wood pits in just a couple of moments time.
[speaker003:] Hello to tell you what's on today's Afternoon Show. Flashback F M rewinds to December nineteen eighty three, from three meet former radio four Today presenter John Timpson with another of his wacky books which takes him all over the country looking at the unusual including some of the things you never knew existed in North Yorkshire. Gumboots and Pearls is the story of army officers' wives continues and after four anything could happen when the goody and the baddy meet head on. David Leonard and Martin Barris are in panto once again at York Theatre Royal they pop in straight from rehearsals. And our class of the week today come from King James School in Knaresborough. Tuesday's Afternoon Show with between two and five I hope you'll join me.
[Jonathan Cowap:] It's nineteen minutes past nine. If it goes ahead it'll cover nearly three hundred and fifty acres and consist of thirty million tons of coal. British Coal's plans to build a huge coal tip at Gascoigne Wood could get approval later today. An official from the Inspectorate of Pollution had expressed worries that the scheme would cause more pollution but today those criticisms have been withdrawn. Well local people protesting in the area say they'll fight the scheme and they plan to lobby the meeting of county planners at ten thirty in Northallerton this morning which has been called to discuss the scheme. Well joining me on the line is the Minerals Planning Consultant from the protester's group that's er Peter and in our Northallerton studio is John who's the County Planning Officer. First er but I've been tol I'm sorry I'm I haven't realized Scott was joining us on the line. Good morning and he's with us as well. Good morning Mr.
[Mr Mcmillan Scott:] Good morning.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Erm well I don't really know what to ask you because I was prepared to erm
[Mr Mcmillan Scott:] Well shall I tell you what you were going to ask?
[Jonathan Cowap:] Yeah go on you tell what you were going to ask me.
[Mr Mcmillan Scott:] No the position is that er given that this is a fourth stage er planning process. You've got the District Council the County Council then the national Government may intervene by calling in the application. But there is a fall-back position and that is that the European Community have a directive called the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive that requires that before a major project of this type is put through there must be the fullest public consultation. In my view,a although there's a current debate about this there has not been the fullest public consultation and I would er myself be minded to invoke the er E C directive on this er in order to try and er to make sure that the the public feel they are fully aware of what the proposals are.
[Jonathan Cowap:] So you wouldn't be necessarily satisfied then with discussion purely at a local level and a decision here?
[Mr Mcmillan Scott:] No I th the the public inquiry that should take place in my view would would of course be conducted locally would involve all local interest and would have the benefit of independent views by experts on the environmental impact of this er proposal. So what I'm really asking for is full democracy and not the rather closed democracy that we've been used to in this country er for too long.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Mr that you very much indeed for joining us on the programme this morning. Took me by awares er by er by surprise. Let me go to er where I expected to go now to John the County Planning Officer. What do you think to erm what erm you've just heard the North Yorkshire Euro MP Edward have to say there about his erm keenness to see a public inquiry?
[John Reynoldson:] Well the County Council is quite clear on this. We are an experienced Planning Authority. County councillors have been dealing with British Coal in relation to Gascoigne Wood and Selby complex for twenty years. In that limited area where we lacked expertise we have employed outside consultants to advise the council. I believe that we have wi will be fulfilling all our statutory and moral responsibilities in the way that we have dealt with the application. We've dealt with it fully in compliance with the law including an environmental statement. Mr refers to European law and environmental statements that was passed into British legislation we have fully complied with that. An environmental statement was required from the company it has been given full publicity I believe that the Planning Committee and County Planning Committee today have sufficient information to come to a decision an informed decision.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Well le let's just hear what er Peter has to say about that. He's the Mineral Planning Consultant from the protester's protest group. Good morning Mr.
[Peter:] Good morning.
[Jonathan Cowap:] What would your comment be?
[Peter:] My comment is that I don't accept what John is saying. I cannot for the life of me see why the County Council as the Statutory Authority and supposedly an independent er er body to British Coal is so resistant to a full public inquiry when only the clear er proposals of British Coal will come out. I cannot for the life of me see why they're so resistant to it.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Mr.
[John Reynoldson:] We're resistant to it not for any dogmatic reason but we don't feel that local democracy is necessarily improved by the County Council d d ducking it's decision. We are the responsible Authority if members, and it's their decision this morning, believe that they have all the relevant information then they will stand up and be counted.
[Jonathan Cowap:] But the local people are clearly very concerned about it. The the the er the joint villages action committee wants a public discussion to take place in a in a public forum with the set rules of a public inquiry. Why shouldn't they have that? I mean this coal tip is isn't going to be based on what I said a moment or two ago with it's thirty million tons of coal covering nearly three hundred and fifty acres a bit of a monster.
[John Reynoldson:] Well you say that but I mean there are plenty of other coal disposal facilities in the country. What eventually is proposed would be very similar to Hambleton and Bath in terms of its impact in the local environment. There are few people, I'm very concerned for those people and we will be imposing conditions if members wish to approve it to protect the interests of the few people in close proximity, many of the objectors er they must be heard and their point of view is report in the committee papers but they do live at er a couple of miles from the site. Er I would say that the impact of the development if it goes ahead must be limited at that distance. I don't believe there will be problems at that distance of noise of dust and the visual impact of this hill must be limited at that distance.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Is it horrible?
[Mr Mcmillan Scott:] Yes can I come back on one or two points there. W w the County Council have a duty to er consider this application so it's not a question of them ducking their responsibilities they're not capable of in law of ducking their responsibilities. But what they have done is something quite unprecedented in my view and that is to actually write to the Secretary of State and say to him do not exercise your rights to call this matter in to consider beside or above th the County Planning Authority. And that is in the teeth of the partition of three thousand four hundred signatures from local people and urgent requests from those communities that the County Council allow the Secretary of State full discretion in this matter to call the matter in. There has been a positive attempt at denial of local democracy.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Why have you why have you done that Mr?
[John Reynoldson:] Well we've not done that at all. What we have said and we will be referring my recommendation to the Planning Committee today is if they're minded to approve it and subject to a legal agreement and subject to conditions, we will refer it as a departure to the Secretary of State. What we have said what members have already resolved is that they do not believe that it is necessary for him to intervene. This is not a unique case the Planning Committee at its last meeting made a similar recommendation on a different mineral site. I don't believe that the Secretary of State has need to call it in and indeed Mr Curry has written to the local Member of Parliament saying his mind is still open but on the information he had in October he does not think that these that this application raises issues of more than local importance. That is the definition as to why an application should be called in. Does it raise issues of more than local importance. The view of the County Council is that it does not raise those issues.
[Jonathan Cowap:] I'll let Peter come back to you in just a moment erm and there are more question I would ask you as well but erm now we must take a short break with time at nine twenty six. [music jingle] We'll get the latest on North Yorkshire's roads from A A Roadwatch.
[Jason Cullen:] And starting firstly in York city centre. Things starting to ease off following a busy rush hour this morning. It's still a bit busy coming in down there on Tadcaster Road and the usual busy traffic for this time of the day on the junction of Bootham and Gillygate. But elsewhere things certainly easing off now. Also an early drizzly start to the day to the north of the county that seems to be easing off as well. A bit misty but again starting to lift. On the A sixty four east of York the outside lane closures are still in place this morning between Grimsdon and Hopgrove. Also the Hopgrove roundabout itself is being resurfaced right through the day which again is adding to the usual delays for this time of a Tuesday. In York work continues at the junction of Askham Lane and Ridgeway and finally on the A one six eight between Dishforth and Thirsk there's a contraflow on the Tockwith bypass. Jason Cullen A A Roadwatch.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Two rail delays to tell you about. The nine thirty six London Kings Cross service that one is delayed at the moment as is the nine forty two Bournemouth service out of platform five. Apart from that everything else running to time through until the ten o'clock London Kings Cross service out of platform three. [music jingle] Peter you wanted to come back.
[Peter:] Yes indeed I do. [clears throat] Mr claims that this is merely of local importance and at the end of the day twenty years from now or twenty five years from now whenever this the application is imp is implemented and and completed that it would be no more than a replica of er natural features within the Vale of York. Those two points are absolutely nonsense. It is not merely of local importance it is going to be a huge alien feature for twenty years of working and in perpetuity thereafter within a natural rural area and a natural landscape. It is going to be nine and a half times the footprint of Hambleton three and a half times the footprint of Brayton Bath it will tower in its mass beside them and it is totally unreasonable and wrong for anybody to describe it as merely of local concern.
[Jonathan Cowap:] John.
[John Reynoldson:] Well the I have to disagree with Mr on this. The height of the mound will be lower than Brayton Bath it will be lower than Hambleton. I'm not minimizing the impact on the environment during working we are still negotiating the details of restoration with British Coal in the event that members er accept the recommendation in principle today. We are seeking to ensure that the er first area to be built up gives protection to the village of Hambleton and can be restored very quickly. But nevertheless it is an application which is necessary, British Coal at the end of the day would have been delighted not to make it after all. This is going to be a very er difficult and expensive application for them but we have a successful coal industry the jobs associated with it we've got to balance economic interests and environmental interests and I believe we can do so.
[Jonathan Cowap:] A reminder to you if you're listening to the programme this morning and er you are concerned about the creation of this tip at the Gascoigne Wood mine in Selby that you can call us and put your question to York six four one six four one is the number to call. Can I ask you Mr we we reported on this programme yesterday morning that an official from the Inspectorate of Pollution had expressed worries that the scheme could cause more pollution. But today we learn that those criticisms have been withdrawn. Why? Why's he changed his mind?
[John Reynoldson:] There was an overlap in terms of certain areas of responsibility between Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution letter which was one of objection and the National Rivers Authority. We said to both of them, look you are quasi-government organizations who are sponsored by government departments there can only be one technical view. You're not expressing opinions you're expressing technical er situation.
[Jonathan Cowap:] wasn't really a technical situation I thought I was told yesterday that the erm letter from the Inspe the Pollution Inspectorate was a matter of opinion. It wasn't a a technical statement at all it was it was an opinion from an inspector.
[John Reynoldson:] He said that there was a risk of pollution. Now that is a technical issue. I asked both bodies to get together if they needed further information from British Coal they should secure it. That's what H M I P did they got further information from British Coal they met er on Friday er with their colleagues at the National Rivers Authority and it's from that greater understanding of the application that H M I P have now said that they are prepared to withdraw their objection subject to the imposition of the conditions at the N R A request.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Peter what
[Peter:] to do that.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Peter why do you think the erm the Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution have changed their mind?
[Peter:] Because they've been pressured into an opinion on one particular aspect of their letter. But don't forget that their letter really addressed three fundamental issues. It addressed air quality they criticize the threat to air quality in their letter and that hasn't been addressed by the N R A it's beyond the N R A's permit to to do that. And then we have the third issue which is site selection and here they are at one with the local communities when they say this particular er selected site has been driven by economic consideration and not environmental consideration. And that is against the advice of Government in its circular advice to the coal industry and indeed to the County Council. So they might well have had convenient discussions with the N R A as late as Friday even though their letter preem the Inspectorate's letter was written on the eighth of September and Friday of course was the day after this letter had been released to us on our request and was was two days after the Selby committee had met on Wednesday. Howev it's all too convenient and it's all too easy we have a perfect example of of of bureaucratic shuffling. Shuffle it between enough parties for long enough and and the issues will get lost.
[Jonathan Cowap:] John
[John Reynoldson:] No.
[Jonathan Cowap:] bureaucratic shuffling?
[John Reynoldson:] Certainly not I mean the other issues as as Mr quite rightly says are air quality and the letter from the Inspectorate now says I understand that the measures taken by British Coal, and they've moved on since September, the measures taken by British Coal are now to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority which for air quality is the District Council. And on site selection, well that is not why I consult er H M I P I want their technical views. Site selection has been dealt with and is a ss straight forward planning issue.
[Peter:] No it isn't. I think it's a it's a question that they are perfectly right under the environmental protection legislation where the H M I P are given wider powers. I think it is a perfectly legitimate area of comment for them. But can I answer specifically John's point John 's point on the matter of agreement between H M I P now and the Selby District Council on the matter of air quality. The latest report from the Environmental Health Department of Selby District Council which was made available to the Selby District Council Planning Committee last Wednesday clearly criticizes the issue of air quality based on the British Coal proposals as they stand. They say that there are going to be dust clouds issuing from this site comparable to the dust clouds that used to issue from the P F A lagoons at Brotherton. And that's almost a straight quotation from that report. So if the H M I P are now at one with Selby then they must still stand by their view that there is a considerable risk to air quality as outlined in point one of their letter of the eighth of September. Now it is for these reasons all of these different views and these conflicting opinions coming from authoritative sources and the concern the locals have that this issue has been ramrodded through on a political ticket is is is the very reason why it should go to an inspector appointed by the Secretary of State at least some semblance of independence and that issues brought out in in full public consideration.
[Jonathan Cowap:] John John well let John let John answer that.
[John Reynoldson:] It's not been ramrodded through on a political basis. My report to the Planning Committee is a sound professional technical planning report and I believe that on the information that I've been supplied with I can recommend to the Planning Committee to approve the application.
[Jonathan Cowap:] You've got three thousand people locally who've their signatures to a petition who don't want this thing on their doorstep because they're worried that they've tha that there're going to be things wrong with it's going to affect the quality of the lives of people in Selby. That's what all boils down to doesn't it at the end of the day and you haven't succeeded as far as I can see in convincing people, those three thousand signatories, that erm it's not going to affect their lives and the quality of their lives and their their environment adversely.
[John Reynoldson:] No but I think it is interesting that some of the Parish Councils for instance who initially were opposed to the application and very strongly, as they have been supplied with further and better information have modified their position and are now saying subject to rigorous planning controls they are no longer opposed outright to the application. Things have moved on application details have been supplied and will continue to be. I mean we will be working with British Coal to work it out further in fine detail. We're go entering proposing to enter into legal agreements as well as planning conditions if it is to go ahead.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Let's hear from some erm local people on the subject of er of the proposed er tip site at Gascoigne Wood near Selby. Reminders that you can call in as well on six four one six four one on the York exchange if you've a point you'd like to make. Terry Terry we've been keeping him waiting on the line a long time good morning Terry.
[Terry:] Good morning.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Erm you I understand live erm quite near to the proposed development.
[Terry:] Yes it's within six hundred and fifty meters.
[Jonathan Cowap:] And what's your wha what's your feelings?
[Terry:] Well obviously we're against the proposals er because of the noise element and obviously the dust. As it's been noted in the previous conversation there is er a possibility of obviously dust from the i it's spoil by the way not coal.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Yes sorry that was my my mistake.
[Terry:] Coal can be moved spoil is there for ever. We've got this on our doorstep for twenty thirty forty years and longer. Er because of the problems the stock piles of coal at various pits, I think there is about forty five million tons stocked at various pits, they'll still be using coal from Bywater and so that there's no necessity to to mine coal in such er vast amount. Obviously the affect of the change in the pit review procedure has changed a lot. This was muted well before the the pit review body decided to sort of close pits down.
[Jonathan Cowap:] But a a away from the the the politics and the necessity to to mine coal yeah or nay, your personal worry is that you live close to the proposed site and it's going to somehow adversely affect the quality of your and your family's life.
[Terry:] Yes.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Okay let's put that to John what er what reassurances can you to er to Terry living six hundred and fifty meters away from this planned development? He he doesn't believe the reassurances he's heard so far.
[John Reynoldson:] Well I believe that we I am confident in fact that we can impose conditions and more importantly place conditions that will minimize the dust. We're proposing codes of practice to operate it. It's not coming completely new to us this type of operation. We have experience at Common and at Barlow with disposal of power station ash. slightly different material but substantially the same n nature same scale of development, I believe that we have a track record that shows that we were are tough and will continue to be tough I
[Jonathan Cowap:] Terry do those reassurances that the County Council Planners are going to be tough do they erm lay some of the er the fears that you have?
[Terry:] In a word no.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Why not?
[Terry:] We've had assurances before we we've had no dialogue with the County Council. We wouldn't have had no dialogue with British Coal or very little dialogue. I have a quick phone call I think it was June or July just stating what they wanted to do and i in my opinion it was passed then and it is political.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Terry thank you very much indeed. Peter if you're still with us.
[Peter:] Yes indeed.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Wh erm Terry's feelings there do they you've obviously been speaking to to large numbers of protestors do they marry with the other opinions that you hear?
[Peter:] Oh absolutely so. I er er first of all can I correct you? There are not three thousand four hundred signatures say this thing should be refused. That might well be the result at the end of the day when all issues are properly balanced. What the three thousand four hundred are saying is that the County Council and British Coal do not know where they're going with this thing, the full implications of it have either not been properly assessed or indeed not been released to the to the local communities. They feel that as it's their heritage they should have a say in the matter and a proper consideration and therefore there are thousands of signatures saying please can we have a public inquiry. That is what they're saying and I think that that can only be seen as eminently reasonable and I think that that Edward has hit the nail right on the head when he says look if this issue is not properly considered locally there can be no alternative if Government fails in its duty to call it in in the in the interests of of the local communities and the region at large, then it will have to go to Brussels. And I would welcome that initiative right now.
[Jonathan Cowap:] John can you really press ahead with this recommendation in the light of the fact that there is clearly such mass local feeling about it such distrust on on a grand scale of the reassurances that you and fellow planners have made?
[John Reynoldson:] Well I'm disappointed that there is this lack of reassurance. I mean we have handled it professionally and con and con
[Jonathan Cowap:] I don't I don't I don't I don't think I don't think anybody is denying that but it's clearly not worked.
[John Reynoldson:] Well er it it will be for elected members of course to decide but I mean County Councillors are elected by local people to represent local people but also take decisions on behalf of the community. I don't think that anyone would expect them to shirk that if if we haven't
[Jonathan Cowap:] No but again it does but but but when the but when the local community rises up like this and and expresses such a a heart felt opinion on something elected representatives or not surely they ought to to listen when a specific issue like this is is obviously causing such concern?
[John Reynoldson:] Yes well they are listening. I mean the committee report er and appendices that are going to members today run to thirty plus sides. At the end of the day in any event the County Planning Committee if they accept my recommendation will be sending it off to the Department of the Environment. If the Department of the Environment think that there are issues of more than local importance they will call it in but their preliminary view expressed to the local MP Mr is that they don't believe that's the case. That I stress is a preliminary view they could not and would not wish to make a final decision until they have all the information. But I think that we can persuade them that it is something that Parliament has said a planning application that deals with local issues can be determined locally.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Peter.
[Peter:] Can I there are there are several issues in what John has said. He says there's been proper consultation with the local communities and the local authorities including the parish councils. I'd I'd I would refute that. For example there has been a recent change in the proposals of British Coal in the manner of transportation of this material onto the tip and the manner in which it is tipped and handled. The very core of the issue in environmental terms. Those details have not been sent out to the parish councils for further consultation and I refer there John to circular fifteen of ninety two Publicity for Planning Applications where at paragraph twenty five there is clear Government advice that where the changes are p are where the proposed changes are significant, and these are undeniably significant, there should be reconciliation. There has been none. the local communities have been ignored in these issues and these discussions that are going on between British Coal and the County Council. John then goes on to say well of course we're going to refer this to the Secretary of State. Well of course he is because he is obliged to do it. He's obliged to do it because it is a departure a very significant departure from his own development plan the plan that he piloted through to to tell people exactly what the policies of North Yorkshire County Council were to be. And now he's running against that plan and under the law, section fifty four over ninety one that er of the ninety act, he is now obliged to refer it to the Secretary of State. But what have the County Council done? They've already written to the Secretary of State and said dear Secretary of State we're going to send this to you because it is a departure but please Secretary of State do not call it in do not exercise your powers. And that is in the teeth of the stated wish of these communities. I cannot for the life of me see this is a reasonable attitude on the part of the County Council.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Stew
[Peter:] It is not responsive to the local communities and it is totally lacking in democracy.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Stewart joins us on the line now good morning Mr.
[Stewart:] Good morning.
[Jonathan Cowap:] You live in South Milford I understand one of the
[Stewart:] I do.
[Jonathan Cowap:] the villages concerned. The point you'd like to make.
[Stewart:] Well er the first one is that er er the Mr says that it those people with two mile away from this er tip er will not be affected. Now most of this tip is in the parish of South Milford er so I take it he means he doesn't count those people. And the majority of those have objected are in the area of that two miles.
[Jonathan Cowap:] We'll let his answer that.
[John Reynoldson:] No I'm not ignoring them but what I'm saying is that problems that people are genuinely concerned about of dust or noise are unlikely to have an impact at a distance of two miles. Very unlikely if it is properly controlled in terms of deposition of materials on site then certainly at two miles I don't believe there will be a problem.
[Stewart:] Er ha I can imagine what you would say if it was in two miles of your property as to whether these dusts would affect you or not. But apart from that er this area is a flat plane. There's practically nothing between the residence of South Milford and the horizon with the exception of this hundred foot mound that will exist. And I do erm support Peter that in my view the er District Council and yourselves have not listened and I don't believe the County Council are going to listen to the objections of the local community.
[Jonathan Cowap:] John what can you do in the face of of such distrust?
[John Reynoldson:] Well I'm I'm very disappointed about that I mean we're listening to the local community we're reporting the local communities views but at the end of day South Milford Parish Council have in fact moderated their views. They, it's always argued that the parish councils are closest to local people, they had an out and out objection from the Parish Council initially they have subsequently written to me twice in November moderating that position and saying subject to safeguards they they no longer have an outright objection.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Well Stewart's on the Parish Council aren't you Stewart?
[Stewart:] Yes I am. Er yes well that is so this did come through er very very late indeed er in the and the Parish Council of course are in the situation where they have to cover all eventualities and what er Mr is referring to is a suggestion of using a one O six agreement to protect as far as possible the local communities when the tip is erected. It didn't change the the actual view of the people in the village. It was the Parish Council themselves who had to consider things very quickly and go for what they could best endeavour but you c er I can't see how that can be used to nullify the general view of the public of South Milford and the other parishes.
[John Reynoldson:] Well I mean I quote from the nineteenth of November letter from the Parish Council, The Parish Council fully support the environmental recommendations from the District Council. Now we all know what the District Council view is. The District Council view is quite clearly support the application but be tough on the details. To me that means that the Parish Council have moved qu a long way from their outright objection lodged in the summer.
[Peter:] point there because [clears throat] the the environmental er considerations of the District Council are of course those of the Environmental Health Officer and those that is the report which raises considerable er concern about the dust blow problem and the moisture content of the material to be delivered into this tip. And that is where the Parish Council were coming from. If I can just endorse what Stewart was saying the Parish Council talked to me as their consultant for a while and said look it seems that that with the with the actions of the er County Council writing to the Secretary of State to preempt the call-in procedures and the attitude of the District Council that this thing might well get local planning permission. Can we in the alternative put our case if that is a fait accompli then there must be something for the local communities to be derived from this and therefore we went for protection under one O six agreement as Stewart quite rightly refers to and we also went for [clears throat] the dedication of large areas of the resultant heap for landscaping and for public open space. But that was purely in the alternative to a public inquiry in the first instance with the possibility of alternative means of disposal coming forward and being accepted. And and I don't think the Parish Council's case has been prejudiced in that instance. It is a perfectly reasonable attitude to adopt in the light of all of the circumstances.
[Jonathan Cowap:] John.
[John Reynoldson:] Well er as I say the position of the Parish Council the fact that there have been so many objections are fully reported in the committee papers today. Members will take them into account when they come to a decision. But at the end of the day er my view is that on balance there is a case for this application to go forward.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Peter one final question probably to you. Where can you take your campaign if today's meeting at County Hall in about forty minutes which I know you've got to dash off and and get ready for, erm where can you take your campaign, the joint villages action committee's campaign, if erm the meeting today gives the tip at Gascoigne Woods approval?
[Peter:] Well we've heard what Edward has had to say and the local communities I'm certain draw great comfort from that and we wait and see whether Brussels will exercise its powers, quite legitimately in my view, and and call this in. Er in the alternative of course er the local communities have available er the High Court action which I've referred to during several discussions with yourselves over the last week or two. Erm those are the issues which will have to be very carefully balanced. I would hope however that the committee members at North Yorkshire will see that the local feeling is so deep that the project itself cannot be harmed by a public inquiry and they will make er they will take the decisions which will put this application in that direction and send that message very clearly to the Secretary of State.
[Jonathan Cowap:] John and so far so far as you're concerned the local people are not going to get that public inquiry are they?
[John Reynoldson:] Well no that's a mem that's a member decision.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Why?
[John Reynoldson:] Er but I refute that the County Council is unsympathetic to local concerns. We have got to balance environmental issues and economic issues, We've got a coal field that is a successful coal field it has a severe problem. We're trying to work to resolve that problem with minimal impact in the environment and that's what my recommendations are leading to that's what if it is approved my officers will be ensuring happens if it last twenty years.
[Jonathan Cowap:] How do you feel about the possible threat of intervention from from Europe or even a High Court action?
[John Reynoldson:] Well I don't believe that they would succeed because I think that we have taken account of all the views expressed and that members will be making an informed decision today. Certainly to the best of my knowledge we have fully complied with all the legislation.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Can you give us any idea of the the time scale of when we might learn that decision?
[John Reynoldson:] Well it will be sent off to the Secretary of State in theory he has twenty one days in practice I suspect it will be mid-January at least before we learn.
[Jonathan Cowap:] We shall await it with interest. John thank you very much indeed for answering er everybody's questions this morning. Nice to talk to you bye bye.
[John Reynoldson:] Thank you good bye.
[Jonathan Cowap:] That's John the County Planning Officer for North Yorkshire and before that the Minerals Plan er Planning Consultant from the Protesters Group Peter. One final comment comes from er Frank from er South Milford. Good morning Mr.
[speaker008:] Good morning.
[Jonathan Cowap:] The point you'd like to make.
[speaker008:] Er following on er what er Stewart said as a member of the Parish Council I think the feeling er was given by John that the Parish Council were now against this scheme. I would just like to quote from a circular that was sent round to every resident in South Milford by the Parish Council. And it says, Message to local residents from the Parish Council. The County Planning Committee meet on the seventh of December to cons to consider British Coal application for colliery waste at Gascoigne Wood. South Milford Parish Council whilst being totally opposed to the scheme decided in the best interests of their residents to make the following observations to County, and that is where they've built in the safeguards but they are totally opposed to the scheme.
[Jonathan Cowap:] What will your action be from a local point of view. Erm I've I've I've asked erm your expert who's who's representing the the village the village's interests Peter. Whereabouts will you take erm your action personally at a local
[speaker008:] Well obvious
[Jonathan Cowap:] local level?
[speaker008:] Obviously we will be guided by our consultants but this er er view of is er er meeting with er er great success in the villages because obviously er we feel that if there is a public inquiry then we stand a better chance of British Coal sticking to the promises made when they had the original planning application and removing all waste by train to suitable sites and there's one at Welbeck which is waiting for the material. And
[Jonathan Cowap:] Thank
[speaker008:] and that's what we want to happen.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Frank thank you very much indeed for joining us on the programme this morning.
[speaker008:] Thank you good morning.
[Jonathan Cowap:] Thank you t, good morning to you sir. Formal just how it should be on the B B C thank you very much indeed to everybody erm joining in that debate. And I'm not sure that personally I'm put my hands up and say that I'd understand all the issues but I understand some of the basic principles and I'm beginning to understand er some of the complexities of a a planning issue like this. I hope you enjoyed that discussion I mean well first of all if you live in the Selby area it's been of relevance to you and you've managed to hear what both sides are saying but I I hope even if you don't live in the Selby area it's er you've er found it as fascinating as I have to hear the pros and cons of such a complex issue. Erm a reminder to you that the lines will open at a quarter to nine on erm York six four one six four one tomorrow morning if er you have points you'd like to make. We've still got er er a couple of calls I think to come before the end of er this morning's programme on the subject of erm, I don't know whether it's life imprisonment or er on er on divorce. We'll find out in a moment or twos time. There's a moment before the traffic and travel news now for me to remind you that erm if you're the chairman or the secretary or whatever it happens to be of a particular group whether it be erm the local amateur dramatics society or er a North Yorkshire charity and you'd like the opportunity to have some prime time publicity for what you're doing, particularly in the run-up to the Christmas period [recording ends]