UK Fascism: Cameron will ‘step in’ if councils DON’T fast-track Fracking applications

21st Century Wire says…
This is truly a remarkable development taking place in Britain. Central government appears to have dispensed with any remaining vestiges of modesty, and has fully discarded its ‘democratic’ mask – completely coming out of its fascist closet.

For more information on the real dangers Fracking poses to your community, click here.

It’s a simple concept: when a government acts as a battering ram for transnational corporations – at the expense of its own citizens – then you have naked fascism…

CAMERON: It seems that he will not stop until all of Britain is fracked, and permanently ruined. All for a quick buck.

Adam Vaughan

Ministers will intervene on planning applications for controversial fracking operations if local authorities fail to act quickly enough, the government announced on Thursday, in a bid to fast-track fracking.

Industry and the government have been frustrated at the slow rate of progress on exploratory fracking for shale gas and oil in the UK, which has been bogged down in the planning process.Ministers have been told that applications to drill and frack in Lancashire could be delayed by 16 months in an appeals process after they were rejected by Lancashire county council.

Under the new planning guidance issued today, councils will be strongly encouraged to meet the existing deadline of 16 weeks to approve or reject fracking applications. Greg Clark, the secretary of state for communities, will now systematically be able to ‘call in’ applications and decide himself.

David Cameron said last year that the government is “going all out for shale” and energy secretary, Amber Rudd, said after the general election that she would “deliver shale”.

The Lancashire applications by energy company Cuadrilla, to drill and frack eight wells, were first submitted in May 2014, but Lancashire county council’s development control committee repeatedly delayed to consider more evidence. The committee finally rejected the bids in June, on the grounds of unacceptable visual impact and noise.

The new guidance will affect shale applications at an early stage in Yorkshire and the Lancashire case, as shale appeals and call-ins will now be prioritised by the Planning Inspectorate.

Officials said the changes did not affect other planning hurdles that shale gas companies had to go through, such as applying for environment permits.

Clark said: “People’s safety and the environment will remain paramount and communities will always be involved in planning applications but no-one benefits from uncertainty caused by delays in planning decisions. By fast-tracking any appropriate applications, today’s changes will tackle potential hold-ups in the system.”

Marcus Johnstone, cabinet member for environment, planning and cultural services at Lancashire county council, and a Labour councillor on the committee, said that councils already had to make planning decisions within 16 weeks. The reason the Cuadrilla case had “dragged on” so long, he said, was the deadlines had been extended to get more information.

“I can see what the direction of travel is: it’s to remove local determinism, and the right of local people to have a say,” he said of the new guidance…

Continue this story at The Guardian


16 Responses to “UK Fascism: Cameron will ‘step in’ if councils DON’T fast-track Fracking applications”

  1. Dogman says:

    Although fracking already attracts controversy as an allegedly bio-hazardous industry, a new study takes it up a notch by showing that the practice can badly impact the health of unborn children.

    Babies still in their mothers’ wombs living within a 10-mile range of fracking wells are in much greater danger of congenital heart defects (CHD) and neural tube defects (NTD). This was surmised in a recent study correlating birth data with geographical locations of gas wells and congenital conditions.

    Hydraulic fracking is a process of fracturing rock with the use of pressurized liquid consisting of water, sand and chemicals. It drills deep underground, forming fractures that force gas and other chemicals to come out of rock and into the hole. Proponents believe it is a much more economical way of getting to the gas and oil. Environmental groups maintain the process can cause small earthquakes and badly contaminate water, leading to a myriad of problems.
    The study, called “Birth Outcomes and Maternal Residential Proximity to Natural Gas Development in Rural Colorado” comes from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH) and Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), and explores three variations of birth defects, fetal growth and pre-term birth.

    Some of the resulting conditions include endocardial cushion defect, pulmonary valve atresia and stenosis. It also turns out that if a pregnant mother lives within a 10-mile radius, the chances of the baby inheriting CHDs go up by 30 percent.

    The Colorado study elicited data from sampling nearly 125,000 births in the period between 1996 and 2009.

    “Fracking causes babies to be deformed – the more we learn about fracking, the worse it gets,” Gary Wockner, the director of the Clean Water Action program in Colorado, told environmental business portal while commenting on the research.

    According to Wockner, this is the first serious study in the Colorado area to actually tackle the effects of fracking on people’s health.

    “If you live near a fracking site and you want to have a healthy baby, you should consider moving,” he said.

    There are a reported 47,000 gas wells in the state of Colorado. A substantial 26 percent of those are located within a 300 – sometimes as little as 30 – meter radius of any type of living structure.

    However, numerous studies have been conducted on the chemicals released through the drilling process. According to the study, natural gas development (NGD) has led to emissions of harmful compounds such as nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and others substances. They show up everywhere, from wells to any type of receptacle containing water to pipelines and even home taps – basically, any place associated with the process of drilling.

    A particular recent example, although not in Colorado, included a North Dakota man literally setting the water coming out of his tap on fire.

    Even the less harmful pollutants, according to the study, have the capacity to increase exposure of the unborn fetus to more harmful mutagens.

    And as the study concludes, “taken together, our results and current trends in NGD underscore the importance of conducting more comprehensive and rigorous research on the potential health effects of NGD.”

    In other studies on fracking effects, a recent report from Texas found methane in drinking water after the Environmental Protection Agency decided not to test it, following reports that the company doing the drilling had supposedly already done that and gotten negative results.

    The beginning of January, however, saw the appearance of new testing rules requiring the testing of water before and after drilling to determine its precise effects on the chemical composition of underground water.

    Environmental lobbyists are currently working on recommendations and improvements for these rules, as they claim they are still too weak.

    It remains to be seen how fracking in Colorado will be curtailed when the practice of gas drilling provides the state with nearly 44,000 jobs and brings in hundreds of millions of dollars. However, according to The Gazette, drilling keeps moving closer and closer to populated areas than before.

  2. Dogman says:

    Fracking has the potential to be as controversial and as damaging as thalidomide, tobacco and asbestos, a report from the government’s Chief Scientific Adviser warns.

    The technology has been developed to help oil companies extract gas trapped in shale rock but, the report fears, it could prove to be another innovation that takes society in the wrong direction.

    Drawing a direct comparison with fracking technology chief scientist Mark Walport’s annual report said: “History presents plenty of examples of innovation trajectories that later proved to be problematic — for instance involving asbestos, benzene, thalidomide, dioxins, lead in petrol, tobacco, many pesticides, mercury, chlorine and endocrine-disrupting compounds, as well as CFCs, high-sulphur fuels and fossil fuels in general.

    “In all these and many other cases, delayed recognition of adverse effects incurred not only serious environmental or health impacts, but massive expense and reductions in competitiveness for firms and economies persisting in the wrong path.”

    The report, the Annual Report of the Government Chief Scientific Adviser 2014. Innovation: Managing Risk, Not Avoiding It. Evidence and Case Studies, said that while innovations and technological advances are to be welcomed, they need to be fully assessed.

    “It is not only important that innovation be efficient and competitive in any particular direction. It is also crucial for economic and wider social wellbeing that the prioritized directions for innovation are as robustly deliberated, accountable and legitimate as possible,” it stated.

    “An economy that fails to do this exposes itself to the risk that it will become committed to inferior innovation pathways that other more responsively-steered economies may avoid. In other words, innovation may ‘go forward’ quickly, but in the wrong directions.”

    It added: “Whether deliberate or inadvertent, each direction for innovation is a social choice involving issues of uncertainty, legitimacy and accountability as well as competitiveness.

    Fracking has been enthusiastically championed by the government (Getty Images)
    “It is important to acknowledge these complexities of choice, because innovation debates in particular areas often become quite simplistic and polarized.”

    Fracking has been enthusiastically championed by the government but has come under intense criticism by environmental campaigners.

    A joint Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering report published in 2012 concluded that fracking can be “managed effectively” in the UK provided there is strong regulation.

    Greenpeace UK’s energy campaigner, Louise Hutchins, described the report as a “naked emperor moment” for the government.

    “Ministers are being warned by their own chief scientist that we don’t know anywhere near enough about the potential side effects of shale drilling to trust this industry,” she told The Guardian. “Ministers should listen to this appeal to reason and subject their shale push to a sobering reality check.”

    Source is The Independent

    • Nollidge says:

      “Ministers should listen to this appeal to reason and subject their shale push to a sobering reality check.”
      What planet is she on?.
      Politicians only listen to whoever gives them te “biggest drink” & the most reliable promise of a well-paid job when they get kicked out.

  3. Dogman says:

    Fracking uses a toxic chemical cocktail known as fracking fluid.
    Companies using fracking fluid have resisted disclosing the contents of fracking fluid, claiming the information is proprietary. However, samples from well sites indicate that the fluid contains: formaldehyde, acetic acids, citric acids, and boric acids, among hundreds of other contaminants.
    It has recently come to light that, despite the illegality of the action, companies have been caught using diesel fuel in the fracking fluid.
    Fracking removes millions of gallons of precious freshwater from the water cycle.
    Each well uses between two and five million gallons of locally-sourced freshwater which will be permanently contaminated by ground contaminants and toxic chemicals contained in the fracking fluid.
    About half of this water returns to the surface, where it is stored in steel containers until it can be injected deep underground in oil and gas waste wells.
    No one is entirely sure what happens to the other half of the water used in the process. Our best guess is that the water remains underground, though there are indications that at least some of this toxic cocktail makes its way back into the water supply.
    Fracking causes a range of environmental problems.
    At least eight other states have reported surface, ground, and drinking water contamination due to fracking.
    In Pennsylvania, over 1,400 environmental violations have been attributed to deep gas wells utilizing fracking practices.
    Pollution from truck traffic, chemical contamination around storage tanks, and habitat fragmentation and damage from drilling to environmentally sensitive areas

  4. Dogman says:

    One of Canada’s premier scientific bodies has issued a critical report on the state of hydraulic fracturing in the nation, saying the industry has outpaced credible baseline data, scientific knowledge and necessary monitoring.

    Moreover, threats to groundwater are real and immediate due to stray gases migrating along leaky and abandoned wellbores, natural fractures in rock, and permeable faults, it found.

    “These pathways may allow for migration of gases and possibly saline fluids over long time scales, with potentially substantial cumulative impact on aquifer water quality,” noted the Council of Canadian Academies report.

    Basic science on the 10-year-old brute force technology, which blasts rock formations open with water, chemicals and sand, remains in its infancy.

    “The basic scientific knowledge needed to evaluate potential risks to groundwater on the regional scale is largely lacking,” reads the report.

    The 292-page report, chaired by John Cherry, a respected hydrologist at the University of Guelph, took a look at the technology’s impact on water, human health, earthquake activity, well integrity, greenhouse gases and the land.

    To date, industry has injected highly-pressurized fluids down more than 150,000 horizontal wells in North America in order to break apart previously uneconomic rock formations containing oil and gas.

    The report acknowledges that some of the most challenging impacts of hydraulic fracturing may take years to surface in communities and ecosystems.

    “These include the creation of subsurface pathways between the shale horizons being fractured and fresh groundwater, gas seepage along abandoned wells, and cumulative effects on the land and communities.”

    Monitoring is currently inadequate, the report notes, but what has been done “indicates that gas leakage into aquifers and the atmosphere is frequent enough to raise concern. Given the likely future density of gas wells, shale gas development is expected to have a greater long-term impact than conventional oil and gas development.”

    Source –

  5. Lynn says:

    He won’t stop until the country is wrecked. No clean water and contamination is everywhere. The man has his orders it is as simple as that. Another excuse to wring us out to dry. All for Agenda 21.

  6. kingel says:

    Any community, within “sights” of a Fracking Company, should demand FULL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE !

    Last time I looked, a few days ago, a BARREL of OIL was selling at $43.00.

    $43.00 as far as I am aware, does not cover the cost of extraction.
    Fracking companies, often operate using use leverage finance i.e. borrowed money. When the “venture” fails financially, they are not affected.

    After, about 12-18 months oil production from the well drops by around 90%.

    In the current financial/political climate…FRACKING IS FINANCIAL SUICIDE ! !

    So, what is their game ?
    I do not know but, I read an article the other day that hypothesized, UK fracking is a means to destroy/corrupt the LEY LINES.
    Ley Lines, a “possibly” esoteric concept, are said to be a natural POSITIVE energy source of the Earth. A bit like free electricity that feeds energy to PEOPLE i.e. the human body, rather than the kitchen stove.
    The last thing the EL-iteS (SATANIC-i’ll thieve everything SCUM) want, is for the people to become “energized” i.e. an oppositional force to their dark agendas.
    It is also said “negative operations” are placed/built on Ley lines, in an effort to reduce their efficacy. Buildings such as Army camps, prisons etc.

  7. Dogman says:

    Strangely, a leyline locator that was posted on our forum no longer works. Must be a coincidence.

    This site features the St Michael (Mi-Ka-El, St Miguel) leyline. Links Great Yamouth to Penzance

  8. RabbiT says:

    For anyone involved with challenging “call in” applications I recall The Scottish Executive called in the Donald Trump application in Aberdeenshire after the local authority refused it. By my understanding this was totally illegal as applications must be called in before they are decided. The decision of the local authority required to be appealed and Trump refused to do so. Something to check out and otherwise look into if you are affected by such. Clearly Trump has special dispensation which I doubt was written in to the legislation but is otherwise typical of Scottish legal corruption.

    If local authorities delayed determining applications these could be appealed by the applicant as deemed refusals but I am assuming delayed determinations can now be called in. Again if you are affected look into what this new “guidance” is.

  9. john says:

    It doesnt matter what we think this dirty government is going to frack for their own personnal financial gain. What we need to know now is what are we going to do about it. Can we fight them in the courts or is it to be in the the streets?

  10. GNJ says:

    The only reason why Benito Mussolini’s fascism has never taken root in the UK is that they can’t run the trains on time.

  11. Dublinmick says:

    Benito Mussolini’s fascism has always run the UK. In fact papal orders designates only Rome can discard it. You brits are a trip, so brainwashed you don’t know up from down.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.