DOCSLIB.ORG

Marston Moreteyne Action Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Marston Moreteyne Action Group Marston Moreteyne Action Group www.mmetag.com Proposed Rookery South Energy from Waste Generating Station (EfW) Grounds for IPC Refusal - February 2011 Introduction On October 26th, the Marston Moreteyne Action Group (MMAG) registered (Our registration ID is 10004662) as an interested party with the IPC stating that the IPC should refuse consent for the Proposed Rookery South Energy from Waste Generating Station (EfW) and listed cumulative detrimental effects which should outweigh any potential benefits - drawn from the headline generic impacts outlined in the Revised Draft Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (EN-1) and Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3). The purpose of this paper is to provide in more detail the justification for the requested refusal. Where relevant we also refer to The Examining Authority’s Written Questions and Requests for Information. Although these questions were addressed principally to the applicant (Covanta Rookery South Ltd) in many respects not unsurprisingly they touch on matters that are fundamental to the arguments advanced by interested parties as to why the application should be refused. MMAG will argue that the interrelationship and accumulation of issues should lead the IPC to refuse. We leave it to others with expertise to focus on specific issues in greater detail. MMAG are a group of volunteers committed to sustainable development within and around the Parish of Marston Moreteyne and as such are opposed to the application. Our website www.mmetag.com outlines in detail our campaigns to defend the essentially rural nature of our communities and village way of life. We are also members of the Covanta Community Liaison Panel. Initially we were not opposed to incineration of non hazardous waste as a last resort in principle, if no other alternative was possible to landfill. However we have since been persuaded of the arguments advanced by United Kingdom without Incineration Network (UKWIN) who campaign for a UK without incineration of household waste and in particular we are grateful to Professor Paul Connett in convincing us this is achievable. At the outset it is worth remembering that the Marston Vale has already made a significant [email protected] 1 of 20 Marston Moreteyne Action Group www.mmetag.com contribution to waste management and that our communities will for centuries to come, effectively forever, be surrounded by millions of tonnes of landfill accumulated over decades. Residents had assumed with the closure of the landfill sites they could look forward to a moratorium on dealing with waste from beyond Bedfordshire. Incineration will never address the issue of why so much waste is produced. Indeed it will only perpetuate the problem rather than offer a solution. The Statutory Framework In this paper MMAG rely on the key assessment principals outlined in the Revised Draft Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (EN-1) [4.1.1,(ii – iv) and [4.2.4-6] in that the IPC should adhere to the following key principles when examining and determining applications for energy infrastructure and we have italicised key words for emphasis : (ii) The Planning Act 2008 requires the IPC to have regard to the following, in addition to any relevant NPS: any local impact report submitted by a relevant local authority before the deadline for its receipt by the IPC; any matters prescribed in relation to development of the description to which the application relates; the Marine Policy Statement (MPS) and any applicable marine plan; and any other matters which the IPC considers to be both important and relevant to its decision. (iii) The IPC should take into account the national, regional and local benefits (environmental, social and economic) including the contribution to the need for energy infrastructure, job creation and any long-term or wider benefits. These may be identified in this NPS, the relevant technology-specific NPS, in the application or elsewhere. (iv) The IPC should take into account adverse impacts – environmental, social and economic – including those identified in this NPS and the relevant technology-specific NPS, as well as local impacts identified in the application [email protected] 2 of 20 Marston Moreteyne Action Group www.mmetag.com or otherwise. The IPC should ensure it takes account of any longer-term adverse impacts that have been identified and any cumulative adverse impacts. (v) If the IPC is satisfied that the adverse impacts identified (including any cumulative adverse impacts) outweigh the benefits of the proposed development (taking into account measures to avoid, reduce or compensate for those adverse impacts) a consent should be refused. (4.2.4) When considering a proposal the IPC should satisfy itself that likely significant effects, including any significant residual effects taking account of any proposed mitigation measures or any adverse effects of those measures, have been adequately assessed. In doing so the IPC should also examine whether the assessment distinguishes between the project stages and identifies any mitigation measures at those stages. The IPC should request further information where necessary to ensure compliance with the EIA Directive. (4.2.5) When considering cumulative effects, the ES should provide information on how the effects of the applicant’s proposal would combine and interact with the effects of other development (including projects for which consent has been sought or granted, as well as those already in existence). The IPC may also have other evidence before it, for example from appraisals of sustainability of relevant NPSs or development plans, on such effects and potential interactions. Any such information may assist the IPC in reaching decisions on proposals and on mitigation measures that may be required. (4.2.6) The IPC should consider how the accumulation of, and interrelationship between, effects might affect the environment, economy or community as a whole, even though they may be acceptable when considered on an individual basis with mitigation measures in place. Therefore MMAG suggests the IPC has considerable discretion in how it conducts the examination and makes its decision. The IPC should give equal weight to local concerns. The IPC can determine that a single adverse impact [email protected] 3 of 20 Marston Moreteyne Action Group www.mmetag.com could lead to refusal whereas an accumulation of adverse impacts certainly should lead to refusal. Where necessary the IPC should commission its own independent assessments and not rely solely on the applicant or interested parties. The IPC should assess whether the application is destructive to other economic or environmental goals e.g. tourism. The political and policy context The application proposes to provide an important source of renewable energy and the applicant advised the community liaison panel that 50% of the energy produced will be renewable simply through the burning of bio-mass. In July 2009 the then Government published the UK Low Carbon Transition Plan: National Strategy for Climate and Energy pursuant to Sections 12 & 14 of the Climate Change Act 2008. The transition plan aims to deliver emission cuts of 18% on 2008 levels by 2020. This includes getting 40% of our electricity from low carbon sources by 2020 and producing around 30% of our electricity from renewable by 2020 by substantially increasing the requirement for electricity suppliers to sell renewable energy. It is not explained precisely how the application will contribute to achieving the targets arising from the carbon transition plan and Climate Change Act and we believe the IPC as a public body should seek further clarity over this especially since all waste will be transported to the site by road . The Covanta issue has been raised in Parliament twice and local communities have attached great significance to Prime Ministerial statements. On June 30th 2010 our local MP Nadine Dorries (Mid Bedfordshire) raised the following question during Prime Ministers questions; “The American waste giant, Covanta, is proposing to build in my constituency an incinerator about the size of Wembley. Will the Prime Minister give an assurance that decisions about such matters will be made at a local level in future?” The Prime Minister replied “My hon. Friend is right to raise this, and it is right that decisions should be made locally. We want to make sure that all the latest technology for alternatives to incineration is considered, so that we can make sure that we are using the best ways to achieve a green approach.” [email protected] 4 of 20 Marston Moreteyne Action Group www.mmetag.com On February 2nd 2011 Nadine Dorries MP raised the IPC and Covanta at Prime Ministers Questions again and mentioned the welcome MMAG and others were preparing for the IPC. Nadine’s question was: "This Friday, hundreds of Mid Bedfordshire residents, 24 parish councils, the Marston Moreteyne Action Group and I will provide a very warm welcome to the visiting members of the Infrastructure Planning Commission who will be coming to decide whether to grant planning permission for the huge incinerator that Covanta wishes to put in my constituency. If we are truly the party of localism, will the Prime Minister give his assurance that the draft national policy statements that will guide the IPC in its decision will be amended so that the weight is given to the wishes of local people? If they do not want it, it should not be imposed on them”. The Prime Minister replied: "I thank my hon. Friend for her question. We can actually go a bit further than that: I can confirm in her own case that, yes, the IPC will be taking representations from local people, but of course as a Government we have committed to abolish the IPC, because we think that it is too much of a top-down, bureaucratic method and that there should be ministerial decisions that can take into account local opinion and be more democratically run.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Parish Profile St. Mary the Virgin Marston Moreteyne
    Parish Profile St. Mary the Virgin Marston Moreteyne www.stmarysmarston.co.uk Church Walk, Marston Moreteyne, Bedford, MK43 0NE Bedford Deanery Contents Page Introduction 1 Who are we? 1 Can you help us? 2 The Benefice Location 2 Community 2 Leisure Activities 3 Education 3 Church Life Church Activities 4 Worship 5 Pastoral and Ecumenical 6 Leadership 7 Buildings 7 Finance 7 Communication 9 Accommodation 9 Strengths and Challenges 9 St. Mary’s Parish Profile We are St Mary’s Church, Marston Moreteyne and we have a vision. Our vision is... To be a living church, growing in faith and commitment Sharing the good news of God’s love with all residents and visitors to our expanding parish We seek to do this by: 1. Developing our response to God’s love in worship and prayer 2. Encouraging children and young people to grow in faith 3. Expanding the use of the church as a focus of mission and service to the community Our goals 1. To raise the profile of the church in the village, not only as an historic building and centre of worship but as a place where its extended use encourages members of the community to feel part of the church family 2. To improve the facilities for our growing Sunday School 3. To improve outreach within the village, especially to young people, families and newcomers to the area. 4. To encourage the church family and enable them to deepen their faith and develop their talents and abilities 5. To develop and move forward with our Mission Action Plan Who we are Here at St Mary’s we are bucking the trend! Our congregation has grown and is still growing.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bedfordshire Naturalist 52 (Part 1) Journal for the Year 1997
    The Bedfordshire Naturalist 52 (Part 1) Journal for the year 1997 Bedfordshire Natural History Society 1998 ISSN 0951 8959 BEDFORDSHIRE NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY 1998 (Established 1946) Honorary Chairman: MrA. Cutts, 38 Mountfield Road, Luton LU2 7JN Honorary Se'cretary: Mr E. Newman, 29 Norse Road, Bedford MK410NR Honorary Treasurer: Mr C. Rexworthy, 66 Jeans Way; Dunstable LU5 4PW Honorary Editor (Bedfordshire Naturalist): Miss R.A. Brind, 46 Mallard Hill, Bedford MK41 7QS Honorary Membership Secretary: MislY1.J. Sheridan, 28 Chestnut Hill, Linslade, Leighton Buzzard, Beds LU77TR Honorary Scientific Committee Secretary: Mr S. Halton, 7 North Avenue, Letchworth, Herts SG6 lDH Honorary Chairman ofBird Club: Mr B. Nightingale, 7 Bloomsbury Close,Woburn MK17 9QS Council (in addition to the above): MrJ.Adams, Mrs G. Dickens, Mr ~ Dove, Mr ~ Glenister, Mr D. Green, Mrs S. Larkin, Ms A. Proud, .Mr ~ Soper, Mr M.Williams Honorary Editor ( Muntjac): Mrs S. Larkin, 2 Browns Close, Marston Moreteyne, Bedford MK43 OPL Honorary Librarian: Mrs G. Dickins, 9 Ul1swater Road, Dunstable LU6 3PX Committees appointed by Council: Finance: MrA. Cufts, Mr S. Halton, Mr E. Newman, Mr C. Rexworthy, Mr K. Sharpe, Mrs M. Sheridan, Mr ~ Wilkinson. Scientific: M~C. Baker, Miss R. Brind, Mr ~ CanJ?ings,'MrJ. Comont, MrA. Fleckney,Dr ~ Hyman, Mr ~ Irving, Mrs' H.Muir~Howie, Dr B. Nau, Mr E. Newman, Mr'D. Oden, Ms A. Proud, Mr R...Revels·,Mr H.Winter. Programme: Mrs G. Dickins, Mr.D. Green, MrJ. Niles, MsA. Proud. Registered Charity No. 268659 (ii) Bedfordshire Naturalist for 1997, No. 52 (Part 1) .(1998) THE BEDFORDSHIRE NATURALIST No.
    [Show full text]
  • Covanta Resource Recovery Facility Proposal at Rookery South Pit
    Marston Moreteyne Action Group www.mmetag.com Covanta Resource Recovery Facility Proposal at Rookery South Pit Notes re IPC Registration Completing the Registration Form During this registration stage you will be asked for brief comments - at a later stage you will be given the opportunity to provide a more detailed written account of your views • Please note the application form should be completed by each individual - not 1 per household. • The form states a guideline of 500 words. The IPC have clarified this in the following statement - “A representation will not be excluded if it exceeds the 500 word limit but it would assist the examining authority in ensuring that all issues are made known as this will inform a judgement on how the examination will proceed. I would therefore encourage you to state your outline case concisely at this stage.” • The form states – and the IPC has confirmed - that if you do not make reference to a particular point or issue YOU are concerned about at this stage you will not be able to make further representations on that topic at any later stage – including the detailed written account – and/or any hearings. • Please avoid using emotional or colourful language in your submission, The IPC have stated your registration may be rejected or portions redacted if your comments are vexatious or frivolous. How exactly they will judge that is open to question! • The IPC have stated that if your submission is rejected in part or as a whole – you will not be advised until after the registration period has closed and therefore will not be able to re-submit.
    [Show full text]
  • VILLAGE NEWSLETTER February 2021
    Marston Moreteyne Parish Council VILLAGE NEWSLETTER February 2021 PARISH COUNCIL – CHAIRMAN’S UPDATE Budget and Precept 2021/2022 The Council at its January meeting agreed a budget and precept for 2021/2022 which will mean a 0% increase for Band D households. In this way we have been both fiscally prudent and mindful of current economic conditions. Our new Parish Councillor - Jeanette Little The Council is very happy to welcome on board our new Parish Councillor - Jeanette Little. Jeanette is fizzing with fresh ideas about how the Council can be more proactive in crime prevention and engaging with young people which is long overdue and especially relevant today where Covid restrictions close of the opportunities for young people to enjoy life to the full. Noticeboards Two new noticeboards have been ordered for the village as we are aware that the present ones need replacing as it has become difficult to read the information. Sadly, we had hoped they would be delivered this month but due to difficulties the delivery has been put back to the end of February. Cemetery Plans are now in place to enhance the cemetery and provide a new sign, another seat within a contemplation garden, hedge planting to show the different areas and some new flower beds. Some outside funding has been secured from Central Bedfordshire Council to help with this and it is hoped to start fairly soon. A timetable will be formulated for the various items although, of course, the planting will be done in the spring. Marston in Bloom The Parish Council has decided to revitalise the Marston in Bloom scheme and a Working Party has just been set up.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Bedfordshire Council
    Central Bedfordshire Council Central Bedfordshire Council is consulting on proposed changes to the admission arrangements for 2021/22 for its Community and Voluntary Controlled Schools. The consultation is now open and will close at 5pm on 30th January 2020. Information about the consultation including all the proposed arrangements for 2021/22, and an online response form, is available on our website at: www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/consultations For your convenience please find attached the consultation summary information and proposed admission arrangements for 2021/22. …on admission arrangements for the academic year 2021/22 - 1 - 1. Introduction All Local Authorities with responsibility for school admissions must adhere to the School Admissions Code which is the legislation and guidance issued by the Department for Education under Section 84 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. The code states that admission authorities ‘...must ensure that the practices and the criteria used to decide the allocation of school places are fair, clear and objective. Parents should be able to look at a set of arrangements and understand easily how places for that school will be allocated’. Where changes are proposed to admission arrangements, the law states that the body responsible for admissions must publicly consult on the changes. 2. Background Central Bedfordshire Council, as the Local Authority, has a statutory duty to ensure that admissions are co-ordinated within Central Bedfordshire for all children being admitted into the normal year of entry and to ensure that only one offer of a school place is made. There are currently 133 schools within Central Bedfordshire, made up of 98 Primary/Lower schools, 1 Lower/Middle Combined school, 15 Middle schools, 2 Extended secondary schools, 11 Secondary/Upper schools, 1 Alternative Provision Free School, 4 Special Schools and 2 Nursery schools.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Note
    Meeting note File reference EN010068 Status Final Author Karl-Jonas Johansson Date 26 November 2014 Meeting with Millbrook Power Limited and invited stakeholders Venue Marston Vale Forest Centre Attendees The Planning Inspectorate Tom Carpen (Principal Case Manager) Alison Down (EIA Adviser) Linda Rossiter (EIA Adviser) Karl-Jonas Johansson (Case Officer) Millbrook Power Limited Chris McKerrow Nick Johnson Paul Wormald (Peter Brett Associates) Paul Taylor (Taylor Keogh Communications) Daniel Yardley (Taylor Keogh Communications) Millbrook Parish Meeting Cllr Chris Shrimptow Central Bedfordshire Council Cllr Sue Clark (also representing Cranfield PC) John Ellis Annabel Robinson Cllr Ken Matthews Cllr Mike Blair (also representing Ampthill TC) Stewartby Parish Council Cllr David Cooper Cllr John Symonds (Chairman) Lidington Parish Council Cllr Iain Clapham (Chairman) Cllr Jean Peall Marston Moreteyne Parish Council Cllr Robert Morris (Chairman) English Heritage Will Fletcher Ampthill Town Council Cllr Mike Blair (Chairman) Cllr Margaret Wright Dawn Sutherns (Town Clerk) The Forest of Marston Vale Trust James Russell Maulden Parish Council Cllr Chris Tate RJ Parrish and Son Heather Parish South Pilling Farm Emma Tomkins David Tomkins Meeting Project update and to discuss stakeholder issues objectives Circulation All attendees Plus Bedford Borough Councillors Tim Hill & Paul Prescod and officers Kim Healey & Melanie Macleod Welcome and Introduction The Planning Inspectorate opened the meeting by giving an introduction to the 2008 Planning Act which was followed by a project update presentation by Millbrook Power Limited (see attached slides). Stakeholder Issues discussed All parties were advised to engage as soon as possible so that issues raised by stakeholders may be resolved before the application was submitted, as there is very limited scope to change an application after submission.
    [Show full text]
  • Saturday 12 September 2015 10Am
    th Saturday 12 September 2015 10am - 6pm Some helpful hints for Cyclists and Walkers Before the day of the sponsored Bike ’n Hike : • Plan your route and refer to the list of churches and chapels available to visit (see the following pages). • Please complete Part A of the Sponsor form. • Make sure your Church Organiser knows you are participating. • If you are under 18, sorry, but you will need a parent or guardian to sign Part A of the form. At each Church or Chapel you visit, please: • Sign the “Register of Visitors” card. • Ask the helper to initial your entry in Part B of your form. • If the building is closed or no one is about, sign the “Register of Visitors” card and complete Part B yourself. After your ride or walk: • Collect your sponsorship money as soon as you can, showing your sponsors how many churches you visited. • Please try to get any sponsor who is a taxpayer to put a tick in the Gift Aid column, this will allow us to claim from the Government’s Gift Aid Scheme and it costs the sponsor nothing! • Your Church Organiser needs your sponsorship money and the sponsor form by 28 October 2015. Please use the envelope provided. • Please make cheques payable to Beds & Herts HCT . JustGiving You can also seek sponsorship by using JustGiving. Please go to www.b-n-h.co.uk Click onto the JustGiving logo and follow the instructions. Explain you are supporting the Bike ’n Hike and which church will receive half the money. After the event, please print off your JustGiving list of sponsors and attach it to the Sponsorship Form.
    [Show full text]
  • Marston Moreteyne Parish Council
    MARSTON MORETEYNE PARISH COUNCIL Clerk to the Council Mrs. H. Trustam 30 Armstrong Close Wilstead Bedford MK45 3EJ Tel: 01234 743598 Email: [email protected] 28th August 2017 Central Bedfordshire Council Priory House Monks Walk Chicksands Shefford SG17 5TQ Dear Sirs Draft Local Plan consultation Marston Moreteyne Parish Council has considered the information contained within the Draft Local Plan currently available for public consultation. The Parish Council notes the importance of an adopted local plan and that it should address whether there is a need for additional housing to accommodate a predicted rising population within Central Bedfordshire. However, the draft local plan - albeit high-level - is very vague and lacks clarity on important matters such as infrastructure, education and health facilities. It also does not distinguish adequately or transparently between the future housing needs of the existing population and those who choose to reside in Central Bedfordshire in the future. There needs to be further explanation of how the headline numbers for future housing numbers are calculated as they stand in stark contrast to the adjacent Bedford Borough. As a community, Marston Moreteyne has experienced a substantial amount of development and understands only too well that additional homes impact upon existing health facilities, road usage and education. The current new lower school (Forest End) is being extended to accommodate additional pupils as a result from increased housing developments in the Parish. There is therefore some concern regarding the proposal of four new villages in Marston Vale for up to 5,000 new homes and 40ha of employment. The Parish Council is sceptical whether the proposed villages will be sufficient in size separately to generate adequate infrastructure and services as self-sustaining communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Marston Moreteyne Green Infrastructure Plan 2010
    Marston Moreteyne Green Infrastructure Plan 2010 Marston Moreteyne Parish Council Parish Green Infrastructure Plan Marston Moreteyne Introduction Marston Moreteyne’s Green Infrastructure (GI) Plan is part of a programme of 19 parish and town GI plans across the area funded by Central Bedfordshire Council and facilitated by Bedfordshire Rural Communities Charity, the Greensand Trust and the Marston Vale Trust. The partnership of environmental charities was asked by Central Bedfordshire Council to assist in the production of GI plans as between them they have a strong track-record of work with local communities and landowners, to conserve and enhance landscapes, wildlife and history in Bedfordshire. Partners believe that best results are achieved by empowering local communities, giving them a say in issues that affect them. Together they have accrued many years experience of community development, support and facilitating community consultation; as well as planning and delivering green infrastructure projects in Bedfordshire. What the plan shows The community green infrastructure plan shows information about the existing environment, and identifies aspiration and proposals from community members to enhance the local green infrastructure. These aspirations and proposals include priorities to maintain existing assets, enhance or restore existing assets, and create new green infrastructure. The information is shown on a map, which identifies both existing green infrastructure, and aspirations for improving the green infrastructure network. The plan as a whole is based on a robust approach to making and implementing a high quality green infrastructure network for the existing and future residents of Marston Moreteyne. It should be acknowledged that not all of the aspirations identified will be delivered, because there are many other influencing factors, such as the views of landowners, existing planning permissions and allocations, potential future land use allocations and the cost of enhancements.
    [Show full text]
  • 28 August 2017 by POST & EMAIL: [email protected] Development Management Central Bedfordshire Council Prior
    28 August 2017 BY POST & EMAIL: [email protected] Development Management Central Bedfordshire Council Priory House Monks Walks Chicksands, Shefford SG17 5TQ Dear Sir/Madam CBC Local Development Plan Consultation Feedback Thank you for the opportunity to view and explore the Council thinking for local development. We would like to comment as follows. We were supportive of the Marston Park development and accepted this substantial increase to the size of our village. We spoke against the latest Hallam’s development (Moreteyne Park) but only on the grounds that we felt the village had a right to absorb the Marston Park development before this larger scale development began. In our view the planned seven new urban developments will in effect begin the process of coalescence of Marston Moreteyne, Lidlington, Brogborough, Aspley Guise and Woburn Sands. The promise of the MK/Bedford canal and new parkland are dubious and there is no stated commitment to the canal actually being built, simply that it 'could aid the building of the canal'. The use of the terms villages is unhelpful when the development will be larger than Ampthill Town. The land being offered, as always, by O & H Properties runs the entire length from Marston Moreteyne to Brogborough between the rail line and the old A421. We would like to remind the Council that 700 people marched on the A421 to oppose the pseudo 'eco-town' proposal from this land developer and the essence of our opposition was the coalescence of Bedford and Milton Keynes. Yet here we are again...... The proposal seeks to create ribbon development through the Marston Vale and across to Milton Keynes whilst continuing to build on existing settlements like Marston Moreteyne, Lower Shelton and Upper Shelton.
    [Show full text]
  • Post Office Ltd Network Change Programme Area Plan Proposal
    Post Office Ltd Network Change Programme Area Plan Proposal Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and South Lincolnshire 2 Contents 1. Introduction 2. Proposed Local Area Plan 3. The Role of Postwatch 4. Proposed Outreach service Points 5. Additional Outreach outlets 6. List of Post Office® branches proposed for “Outreach” 7. List of Post Office® branches proposed for closure 8. List of Post Office® branches proposed to remain in the Network • Frequently Asked Questions Leaflet • Map of the Local Area Plan • Branch Access Reports - information on proposed closing branches, replacement Outreach services and details of alternative branches in the Area 3 4 1. Introduction The Government has recognised that fewer people are using Post Office® branches, partly because traditional services, including benefit payments and other services are now available in other ways, such as online or directly through banks. It has concluded that the overall size and shape of the network of Post Office® branches (“the Network”) needs to change. In May 2007, following a national public consultation, the Government announced a range of proposed measures to modernise and reshape the Network and put it on a more stable footing for the future. A copy of the Government’s response to the national public consultation (“the Response Document”) can be obtained at www.berr.gov.uk/consultations/page36024.html. Post Office Ltd has now put in place a Network Change Programme (“the Programme”) to implement the measures proposed by the Government. The Programme will involve the compulsory compensated closure of up to 2,500 Post Office® branches (out of a current Network of 14,000 branches), with the introduction of about 500 service points known as “Outreaches” to mitigate the impact of the proposed closures.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)BT's Proposal to Remove 80 Payphones Across Central
    Central Bedfordshire Council Priory House Monks Walk Chicksands, Shefford SG17 5TQ TO EACH MEMBER OF THE EXECUTIVE 05 January 2017 Dear Councillor EXECUTIVE - Tuesday 10 January 2017 Further to the Agenda and papers for the above meeting, previously circulated, please find attached the following:- 12. BT’s Proposal to Remove 80 Payphones across Central Bedfordshire Please find attached the above report. Should you have any queries regarding the above please contact Sandra Hobbs, Committee Services Officer on Tel: 0300 300 5257. Yours sincerely Sandra Hobbs Committee Services Officer email: [email protected] This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 12 Page 3 Central Bedfordshire Council EXECUTIVE Tuesday, 10 January 2017 BT’s Proposal to Remove 80 Payphones across Central Bedfordshire Report of Executive Member for Community Services, Cllr Brian Spurr, Email [email protected] and Executive Member for Corporate Resources, Cllr Richard Wenham, Email [email protected] Advising Officers: Marcel Coiffait, Director of Community Services, [email protected] Peter Fraser, Head of Partnerships Community Engagement and Youth Support, [email protected] 0300 300 6740 This report relates to a Key Issue Purpose of this report 1. To provide the results of the consultation on the Council’s First Decision in respect of the proposal from British Telecom (BT) to remove 80 payphones in Central Bedfordshire. 2. To make the Second Decision (and Final Notice) regarding BT’s proposal, taking into account the response to the consultation. RECOMMENDATIONS Executive is asked to: 1. approve the Second Decision, which is to object to 37 payphones being removed and to agree to the removal of 43 payphones as set out in Appendix 2; 2.
    [Show full text]