London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Actions speak louder than words & Im right or your not even invested & just a troll?
Penguin there you are banging on again all day
There was no negativity in giving SCC a copy of the Egdon Planning appeal ,UKOG want to spare any wasted time for all parties and if they issued the appeal of Egdons it was to help SCC own legal team to knock sense into the council
It's all down to re election and a springboard kle of Nimbyism
They shot their bolt now as UKOg have wealth of credentials and experience in establishing sites,managing them safely and in line with all legislation
I thought at first arbitrate maintain a cordial relationship but frankly when the appeal is turned over SCC have just opened the door to accepting any future planning application providing they are crafted correctly and legal or else it will cost them
Full steam ahead on multiple sites a d all stage planning I would say
Yes UKOG need to also look at whether 6% income to the council is relevant in the circumstances ,perhaps less
We must remember UKOG are not trying to set a precedent with appeal whereby legal grounds are exhausted and the councils own planners agree legality of the application ,that was done by Egdon in this industry .
Got to go strictly's on
I'm under the thumb of a beautifull wife who does everything for me and wouldn't want to spoil it lol
If under national policy if it is not a policy to pay 6% of revinues in taxes & benefits to local causes anything which is not due could be taken out at appeal & not just for Dunsfold but for any future applications under any president set.
I Myself would call long term 5/7p HAPPY With that G L A
Victoria , Players are down more than 30% You got to realise some are in here at 7.75 and possible more i was in at 1p and sold at 7/8p i am back in at 0.15 0.18 / and 0.25 so i am very happy to stick G L A
That can only be seen after the appeal.
Obviously the market has drawn a short term conclusion based on the uncertainty.
I am not here for the short term are you in for the long term I suggest not?
Not certain about negotiations between UKOG & the planning authority?
If you want that information read the whole planning application & compare it to national policy then you can detail any variations.
Surrey council planner's answered the question of it's members as to why UKOG do not need to use local suppliers. Which was that the said NO to UKOGs offer as they could appeal it at a later date.
doesn't sound like you're so certain about this 'voluntary conditions' business - to be honest it sounds like you're guessing / making it up. I don't see much advantage or disadvantage to UKOG regarding local suppliers.
I don't think that UKOG can change elements of the application in the appeal because that would mean the appeal was reviewing something different to what the committee was considering.
Is that why the same government barristers were in the court of appeal defending Surrey council's grant of 25 years oil production & drilling of 4 more wells at Horse Hill the previous week?
Can you really put your faith in central government support for the Loxley project planning application?
If UKOG do not appeal, it follows that Loxley, and other onshore planning applications for oil and gas projects may be refused by local authorities without any fear of consequences or penalties against councils, based purely on rejection of planning policy technicalities.
If UKOG do appeal, will central government support the local authority planners on the technical aspects of the application? They probably will, but arguably, the higher powers that be will assert the development is not needed. After all, OGA has unilaterally ‘paused’ offshore licensing, has no plans for any future onshore licensing and has kicked off a ‘net zero by 2050’ energy policy. Public opinion gone green in all political parties too - which translates to votes in elections irrespective of which party.
And why is a development not needed?
Well, let’s assume the Loxley prospect holds 50 bcf. Assuming a production well yields 5 bcf that means 10 production wells on, say, a 10 year plateau period - or about 5 bcf/year total field production. But 5 bcf is less than 2 LNG cargoes PER YEAR delivered to an existing UK terminal, assuming a typical LNG ship carries ~3 bcf.
Last winter, higher levels of LNG were supplied to UK’s network when compared to the previous winter. In a typical winter, the inter-connectors from Belgium and Holland to predominantly supply gas to the UK to supplement UK North Sea gas production. Last winter (2019/2020) the large levels of supply from LNG, coupled with lower national gas demand due to global warming & renewables, reversed the trend. LNG is trading at about $7/mcf cif, so imported LNG is cost competitive.
Meanwhile, the Chief Engineer driving the UKOG Gravy Train goes full steam ahead as it heads toward the buffers. Toot toot!
Why do you think Surrey council planner's stated at the planning meeting that they had rejected UKOG's offer to only use local suppliers etc. as It could be grounds for appeal.
How many other points have been negotiated as comfort clauses that can now be appealed & set as a president in UKOG's favor for all other Weald applications & costs paid by Surrey council not shareholders?
The only reason for Surrey council & there legal teams to defend this appeal is to try & maintain some of the conditions that they have negotiated as comfort clauses.
The planning officers & legal officers have stated that there are no legal or planning reason for rejections.
That is how much has been offered & scrutinized. The only reason for appeal is the rejection & any points that are not necessary at national level but beneficial at local level.
Let's see what the decision notice says.
As I understand it the application as a whole was rejected. What were these 'voluntary conditions' which presumably were not part of the written application?
Unfortunately it doesn’t quite work like that. These politicians have one main focus of interest. Getting re-elected. I have no doubt they will have met with the objectives and locals and given them their full support. I have seen this happen. They may not even be that averse personally to approving the scheme, but if they feel that it could hurt their chances if re-election they will support the objection.
The appeal will be handled by different people who will then approve the decision. In my view this is all about optics.
Let me give an example of similar political interference.
I was tasked with the closure of a secondary school, which is a long and complicated process, involving huge public consultation. Inevitably county council members get involved and so do MPs. The MP made many vociferous public declarations of support for the local community who wanted the school to remain open. He then made an appointment to see me.
This particular MP was the Leader of the House at the time. A General Election was in the offing. The conversation went something along these lines:
MP “Look I e seen all the research you’ve done and I can see this makes perfect sense, but could we perhaps shelve it for now and look at it again after the GE?”
Not all are like this of course, but this person was purely motivated by his own political ends. We did consider the request, for about 5 mins then ploughed on regardless with our plans.
This sadly is how politics often works.
I agree that the council won't want to risk another farcical rerun.
But I don't agree that any 'voluntary' conditions will be lost. Anything 'offered' in the planning application or subsequently in writing will be part of the application. If it isn't in the application it isn't a condition, and the full planning application considered by the committee is what an appeal will consider.
and unfortunately the appeal decision also won't stop any committee rejecting any future applications - Egdon's successful appeal decision was attached (perhaps not the best idea) to UKOG's final statement.
The council is not going to do anything that as there planning officer's & solicitors have already rejected UKOG offers of extra conditions volanterally applied & both planner's & legal have repeatedly stated that there are NO planning or legal grounds for the permission not to be granted.
Members do not yet understand that apart from costs they will lose many of the conditions which UKOG have volanterally agreed when this goes to appeal.
This will now be decided on a national policy basis & not only will Surrey council lose conditions applied at the Dunsfold application but the national decision will set the precident for all other subsequent permissions.
UKOG have played a blinder in my opinion outsmarting councilor's who believe that it was UKOG rejecting local suppliers when it was council officers as that would leave ground's for an appeal.
But still the NIMBY councilor's voted against.
Now the decisions & many of the comforts applied will be taken away by national planning policy & costs paid from Surrey's local budget.
Well done Surrey councillor's for losing funds & local services for your constituents. I am sure they will remember you at the next council elections.
Will the Council even contest the appeal?
Is this dead in the water now ? Or is there any hope for a reversal / appeal to fix this issue ? Sorry for the short question.
"The same as Brexit vote , They were all on Dole and had time to vote". So our unemployment rate at the time was over 52%?
you can't sue men of straw or women of straw they have no money , you can't take the council house off them , thats why they go to court nothing to loose , They are all on benefit , and legal aid , and had time on their hands
The same as Brexit vote , They were all on Dole and had time to vote , The people who wanted to stay in eu were too busy working , and could not vote , and look at the result They did not want any forgers coming in to work and showing them up G L A
Depends - if you mean that in a virtual dictatorship citizens rights might be steamrollered - then maybe. Meanwhile the UK system which might be buraeucratic where there are at least some (but not complete) protections against government, businesses and individuals doing as the please without justification
I'd be far more in favour if SS used his own money for this pig in a poke.
its a pity central government don,t decide things like this that are of National importance. its incredble that a few numptys can weild such power over the nation.
Are councils in turkey run properly unlike in the uk
Different authorities for different.., authority, and changing the remit of previous planning applications.
Why are companies given a licence area, if they are unable to get planning to test.
Think the next placing may be a bullish signal, that Turkey is about to go-ahead.
For long-term investors in UKOG accustomed to the bureaucratic delays of the UK onshore exploration regime, think Turkey will come as a welcome change.