Rail strikes will reduce services to Epsom, Epsom Downs and Tattenham Corner stations Friday – Oaks Day and Saturday – Derby Day. With over 100,000 spectators anticipated to attend the annual great flat race, held in Epsom for over 240 years, abandoning trains for cars, local roads can be expected to be jammed.

Maybe give that trek to the DIY store a miss this Saturday?

A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “These strikes have been coordinated by union leaders to disrupt passengers in a week which will see major events such as the first-ever all-Manchester FA Cup final, the Epsom Derby and a number of concerts and festivals across the UK.

“Not content with impacting the hundreds of thousands of people who have looked forward to these events all year round, unions are also targeting their own members’ pockets by forcing them to miss out on pay every time they strike.

“The government has facilitated a fair and reasonable pay offer, now union leaders must do the right thing and put this to their members.”

The unions say they have not been given a pay offer they can recommend to their members. Aslef rejected the government’s 4% offer, which they described as “risible” since train drivers have not had a pay rise for four years.

A special meeting of The Epsom and Walton Downs Conservators was convened last night in the Town Hall to discuss arrangements for the Derby. It went into secret session and we can only speculate that the impact of the rail strikes was likely to have been discussed. Cllr Steven McCormick was confirmed as chair and was joined on the podium by Simon Durrant of The Jockey Club, owners of Epsom Downs and the racecourse.

The High Court has today (26 May 2023) announced it will allow further grounds for challenge as part of a Judicial Review by a coalition of councils into the proposed expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).

At today’s hearing, the coalition comprising the London boroughs of Bexley, Bromley, Hillingdon and Harrow, along with Surrey County Council was successful in its appeal, getting two additional grounds for challenge – out of three previously refused in April – added to the Judicial Review.

Those were:

• unfair and unlawful consultation in relation to expected compliance rates in outer London
• scrappage scheme – irrationality due to uncertainty and inadequate consultation.

On 12 April 2023 the High Court granted permission for the coalition to challenge the legality of Transport for London (TfL) and the Mayor of London’s plans to expand the ULEZ to outer London from August 2023.  

The permission then was granted on the following grounds:

• failure to comply with relevant statutory requirements 
• whether the Mayor properly considered the previous “buffer zone” approach as a material consideration in relation to the scrappage scheme.

Matt Furniss, Cabinet Member for Transport, Infrastructure and Growth at Surrey County Council said: “Today’s decision is another step forward in our legal challenge to the Mayor of London, as we continue to highlight the significant financial and social impacts expansion of the ULEZ scheme would have on many of our residents and businesses.

“Our consultation response back in July 2022 clearly highlighted that the Mayor’s decision not to include Surrey residents in any scrappage scheme was unacceptable, and proposed a number of other recommendations to help mitigate the impacts of the expansion. Our concerns have still not been addressed by The Mayor, forcing these legal proceedings to have the voice of our residents heard.

“We remain committed to delivering a greener future, but it must be done in a practical and sustainable way. We will now await the findings of the Judicial Review in July.”

Related reports:

Many Surrey motorists will be paying the ULEZ charge.

ULEZ Court battle looming

Surrey Council’s ULEZ talks ongoing with TfL

Can you beat the ULEZ charge?

Will Me’lud halt ULEZ expansion to Epsom borders?

A sign of no signs to come on ULEZ?

ULEZ will come to Epsom and Ewell borders

A Cumbrian coal mining firm is intervening in a landmark legal hearing to determine whether oil drilling should be allowed in Surrey.  The Horse Hill drilling case is set for the Supreme Court in June with protesters hoping for a ruling that could severely restrict fossil fuel exploration in the UK.

West Cumbria Mining Ltd, the company behind Britain’s first new prospective coal mine for decades has been given permission to intervene in the case over plans for oil drilling at Horse Hill, Surrey according to a Supreme Court order published earlier this month.

In law, an intervention is when a non-party joins ongoing litigation, as the case may affect their rights and they should have the right to be heard. The other intervening parties are Friends of the Earth, the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) and Greenpeace.

The case is being brought by Redhill resident Sarah Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group, which represents communities opposing onshore oil and gas projects. 

Ms Finch is challenging Surrey County Council’s 2019 decision to grant  UK Oil and Gas (UKOG) planning permission for drilling – on the grounds that environmental impact assessments must take into account downstream emissions caused by burning extracted oil.

Her fight has now reached the country’s highest court after three judges were split over the lawfulness of the county council’s decision to grant permission for 25 years of oil drilling and production – in the same year the county declared a climate emergency.

Carbon emissions from burning the extracted fossil fuels were not included in either the Horse Hill or Cumbrian coal mine’s environmental impact assessments.

Ms Finch said: “The fact that West Cumbria Mining wants to have its say in a case about a small onshore oil development 370 miles from their proposed coal mine shows the national importance of this case. I hope that the Supreme Court will confirm that no fossil fuel development – coal, oil or gas – should be allowed without consideration of its full climate impact.”

According to UKOG the Horse Hill site in Reigate and Banstead has so far produced about 185,000 barrels of oil. Approximately 1.362 million remain.

Friends of the Earth campaigner, Tony Bosworth, said: “The biggest climate impact from gas, coal and oil projects occurs when the fuel they produce is eventually burned – it’s unbelievable that this is effectively ignored when planning decisions are made. This landmark legal challenge could have huge implications for fossil fuel developments across the country, including the new coal mine in West Cumbria. West Cumbria Mining are clearly concerned, which is why they have intervened. 

“West Cumbria Mining boast that they will build the world’s first zero carbon mine, which is a complete contradiction in terms. Their calculations also ignore emissions from when the coal produced is actually used – that’s like saying that we should ignore the health impacts of smoking cigarettes and just look at how they are produced. 

“We need to stop burying our heads in the sand. Sarah Finch’s legal case could play a huge role in building a net zero future.”

OEP general counsel, Peter Ashford, said: “Environmental impact assessment is so important for integrating the environment into planning decision-making. We are interested in this case because of the opportunity to clarify the law here to ensure proper decision-making that enhances environmental protection.  We hope that the Supreme Court will take this opportunity, and will develop principles for determining the proper approach to the assessment of indirect effects under the EIA legislation.”

The hearing is scheduled for June 21.

The coal firm is now battling on two legal fronts after a judge ruled on Friday May 19 to grant Friends of the Earth and South Lakes Action on Climate Change a hearing to challenge the UK Government’s decision to approve West Cumbria Mining’s deep coal plans.

That hearing is expected to last for three days when it is heard later this year.

A spokesperson for West Cumbria Mining Limited said it would be inappropriate to comment on a live legal case. UKOG have been approached for comment.

Related Reports:

A Surrey Borough funds legal fight to stop oil drilling

The Hills Are Alive With the Sound of Drilling… ?

Surrey MPs oppose each other on drills in the hills

Oiling the wheels of justice on Surrey Hills

Image credits: NASA’s Earth Observatory and Rainer Lesniewski Getty Images

May is the month to talk about walking, more walking and even more walking. The weather is brighter, dryer and warmer and is the best time to get outdoors as a family.

We know how important walking to school is for children’s health and the environment. It reduces congestion, improves road safety at the school gates and instils lifelong healthy habits. It’s been proven that children who do some form of exercise, especially a walk before school, do better in class because they arrive refreshed, fit and ready to learn.

The school run alone is responsible for generating half a million tonnes of CO2 nationally per year

Not everyone is able to walk to school, but there might be part of the journey you could walk. This Walk to School Week (15 to 19 May), could you think about turning rides into strides which can really make a difference? Take a look on our active travel webpage for inspiration.

Making it safe for Surrey’s children

It’s important for parents to know that their children are safe when walking along a road. This is where our Feet First: Walking Training comes in – a programme that provides school children aged 7 to 8 years old (Year 3) with the road safety skills to enable them to safely walk to and from school with their parents and carers, whilst also preparing children to travel independently in the future. The training is done in the classroom as well as using online resources, at home activities and taking children outside on Surrey’s streets for them to practice what they’ve learned in a real-world environment. It includes teaching:

• The Green Cross Code and how to cross the road safely
• Road signs and pedestrian crossings
• Recognising safe and unsafe places to cross
• Dealing with distractions and rushing
• How to cross between parked cars
• Understanding vehicle lights and sounds
• Crossing driveways
• The benefits of active travel

Last term, our Feet First: Walking Training instructors taught 3,500 pupils across 65 schools the skills they need to stay safe on Surrey’s roads. By the end of this academic year our instructors will have taught over 5,500 pupils at nearly 100 primary schools in the county.

For more information on the training visit the Walking training for schools webpage or speak to your school to see if they’re signed up.

The June 8th judicial review against the Government’s decision to allow fossil fuel drilling near an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty will go ahead. Waverley Borough Council held a special meeting of its executive committee to approve the £82,500 in funding to proceed – £32,500 for legal costs with a further £50,000 set aside in case it is liable for the oil driller’s costs.

According to the published papers, the executive considered “it a moral imperative to continue its legal challenge”. The money was approved on Thursday, May 11, as the council continues its four-year battle to stop UK Oil and Gas from drilling at Loxeley Well in Dunsfold  – and means the judicial review into the exploratory drilling of £123 million of oil by UK Oil and Gas (UKOG) can proceed.

Addressing the meeting was Councillor Steve Williams, Green Party member and portfolio holder for environment and sustainability. He said: “In July 2019, we held a listening panel where we could listen to the views of residents on this proposal that was in the air to undertake on-shore drilling in Waverley, in Dunsfold. We listened and we listened to the concern after concern in terms of the local environment as well as to the planet and the people of Dunsfold. The impact was absolutely clear and from that point on Waverley Borough Council saw it as its mission to do exactly that, to protect Dunsfold and to stop the drilling. It was consistent in terms of our position in declaring a climate emergency and committing ourselves to carbon neutrality.”

The original planning applications were rejected by Surrey County Council’s planning committee members in 2020. UKCOG then mounted an appeal which was eventually called in for review by the Secretary of State, Michael Gove. Mr Gove recused himself due to possible conflicts of interest, but former Housing Minister, Stuart Andrew ruled in favour of the plans.

Cllr Williams added: “Now is the opportunity for Waverley executive to follow this through.We would, if we did not do so, be inconsistent with our previous clear commitment on this issue. We would be neglecting our duty to the people of Dunsfold, we would be flying in the face of our climate emergency. It is imperative, for if we are to be successful in this, and I very much hope we shall be, but we should be putting our money where our mouth is, for the people of Dunsfold, for the natural environment, and for the planet.” He said the council must “take the next step and secure that judicial review in the anticipation of the outcome we’ve been working for four years”.

Cllr Liz Townsend, Lib Dem member and portfolio holder for planning and economic development, said the application had “wide implications”, not just for the borough, but the country as a whole. She said: “It’s difficult to believe that the UK already has 509 fossil fuel sites specifically in protected areas. More than any other country in the world. South Downs national park already holds nine oil and gas sites. If the Loxley well site is successful how many other sites will be allowed?”

She added, while some may view this as a David versus Goliath battle we “should remember who was the winner of that conflict”.

The committee heard that the cost to residents would work out to about 65p per person but had the potential to set a national precedent.

The committee also called on Dunsfold and Alfold Parish Councils to offer their “substantive” and vocal support.

Related Reports:

The Hills Are Alive With the Sound of Drilling… ?

Oiling the wheels of justice on Surrey Hills

Surrey MPs oppose each other on drills in the hills

Fractious Court case anticipated

Over £12m of grant funding is now available for Surrey residents whose homes are not heated by gas, to make their homes more energy efficient and environmentally friendly.

Residents living in hard to heat homes and on lower incomes could receive up to £38,000 to fund measures that; improve a range of insulation including wall, loft and underfloor; install solar PV, solar thermal and air source heat pumps and ensure ventilation meets the industry standards.

Eligible properties must have an EPC rating of D-G, the primary form of heating must not be mains gas and applicants will need to meet the financial eligibility criteria. Funding is limited and will be on a first-come, first-serve basis. Residents can check if they are eligible by visiting contacting Action Surrey via the website – www.actionsurrey.org or calling 0800 783 2503.

Marisa Heath, Surrey County Council Cabinet Member for Environment said: “It is still a challenging time for many households who are struggling in this cost of living crisis which we are all facing, which is why it’s so important we reach out and help those who need us the most.

“I’m sure there are many residents who do not realise they are eligible for this funding, which is a great opportunity to reduce their energy bills whilst reducing their carbon footprint. I’d like to encourage all residents living in homes not heated by gas to check if they are eligible and help us achieve our goal to be a net zero county by 2050.”

Lord Callanan, Minister for Energy Efficiency and Green Finance, said: “This investment will help thousands of households to heat their homes for less, keep them warm for longer and could save hundreds on their annual energy bill.

“The green energy sector is growing, and this funding will support green jobs and provide the training needed to deliver these vital upgrades to homes.”

Surrey County Council has been awarded Government funding through a second phase of the Home Upgrade Grant. The project will be delivered by Action Surrey – an energy efficiency advice service set up in partnership with Surrey local authorities.

Sign up to the Greener Matters newsletter to keep up to date on Surrey County Council’s progress towards its target of making Surrey net zero by 2050 and find out what you can do to help.

Earlier today Epsom and Ewell MP Chris Grayling called upon the Government to ban industrial fishing boats from “scalping our sea beds and hoovering up marine life regardless of what gets trapped in their nets, especially in the UK’s marine protected areas”. Secondly, he called for the creation of “‘Highly Protected Marine areas’ around our shores, as recommended by the Benyon Review. Where no extractive activity is permitted. Where nature can be left to its own devices.”

Thirdly, he has asked the Government to “provide both regulatory and financial support to those looking to restore sea grass beds.”

Photo: Chris Grayling MP argues his points in Tuesday’s Marine Protection Areas Debate in Westminster. Parliament TV.

Rounding off his contribution in a special debate on the marine environment Mr Grayling referred to all the worldwide illegal fishing that goes on with impunity. He suggested the Government works on international accords that will “require every fishing vessel around the world to have proper satellite monitoring devices on board.”

He also called for improved sustainable fishing food labelling.

Mr Grayling addressed the meeting in Westminster on Tuesday 2nd May in the afternoon.

There could be more than 250,000 cars on Surrey’s roads that do not meet ULEZ complaint standards. That figure climbs to 335,584 cars when counting those with Statutory Off Road Notifications (SORN), according to a Freedom of Information request by the LDRS.

The figures are based on collective postcode data supplied by the DVLA and include some crossover, for example with Chipstead and Coulsden in London, and on the border with East Grimstead in West Sussex.

According to Transport for London “petrol cars that meet the ULEZ standards are generally those first registered with the DVLA after 2005, although cars that meet the standards have been available since 2001. Diesel cars that meet the standards are generally those first registered with the DVLA after September 2015.”

In Surrey postcodes, recorded information held by the DVLA shows there were 71,892 petrol engine cars first registered before January 1 2005, with a further 50,655 classed as SORN. The figures are worse for non-compliant diesel cars, with 190,026 licensed and 23,011 SORN first registered before September 1 2015. Combined that means there are 261,918 non ULEZ  compliant taxed cars registered to Surrey postcodes and a further 73,666 off road.

The figures were from a snapshot census of the DVLA vehicle record which is taken quarterly and is up to date to February 2023.

The ULEZ boundary is expected to be expanded to the Surrey border in August and would mean that those driving with petrol vehicles registered before 2005 or diesels users before 2015 will need to pay a £12.50 daily charge.

In February, ​​Surrey County Council joined forces with four London boroughs to launch a High Court legal challenge against Transport for London (TfL) and the Mayor of London’s decision to expand the zone.

In April a judge ruled there was a case to be heard on two grounds – the legal basis for the scheme and the rollout of the scrappage scheme. It is expected to be heard in July.

Among the things Surrey County Council is calling on the Mayor of London provide are more data on the impact to residents, extend car scrappage and the Zone 6 Oyster Card scheme and to provide corridors to NHS facilities that are on the border,

Key workers, who regularly have to travel to London, should also be exempt, the county argues.

The Local Democracy Service has also requested that these figures be broken down by individual postcode.

The full list of postcodes included in the data is: CR3, CR5, CR6, GU1, GU10, GU12, GU15, GU16, GU18, GU19, GU2, GU20, GU21, GU22, GU23, GU24, GU25, GU26, GU27, GU3, GU4, GU5, GU6, GU7, GU8, GU9, KT10, KT11, KT12, KT13, KT14, KT15, KT16, KT17, KT18, KT20, KT21, KT22, KT23, KT24, KT7, KT8, RH1, RH10, RH12, RH19, RH2, RH3, RH4, RH5, RH6, RH7, RH8, RH9, SM7, TN16, TN8, TW15, TW16, TW17, TW18, TW19, TW20

Related reports:

ULEZ Court battle looming

Surrey Council’s ULEZ talks ongoing with TfL

Can you beat the ULEZ charge?

Will Me’lud halt ULEZ expansion to Epsom borders?

A sign of no signs to come on ULEZ?

ULEZ will come to Epsom and Ewell borders

The University of Surrey’s Professor Jin Xuan has won a prestigious Open Fellowship from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) to develop the next generation of clean energy devices using advanced artificial intelligence. 

As well as using electrochemical technology to explore established applications like green hydrogen production and CO2 reduction, Prof Xuan will also develop future technologies, with a particular focus on cleaner, greener fertilisers. 

Prof Xuan said: 

“Manufacturing fertiliser to help crops grow is hugely carbon intensive, but if we can achieve a breakthrough on the difficult electrochemical reduction of nitrogen to generate ammonia, we could make significant steps to address this. 

“The answer lies in artificial intelligence to design the complex electrochemical devices, but many existing algorithms in this area don’t offer explanations for how the AI comes to its conclusions. The relation between the inputs and outputs is a mystery, but I plan to open the ‘black box’ to find results which are reliable, explainable and transferable.” 

The five-year fellowship will enable Prof Xuan to develop Explainable Artificial Intelligence tools and models which lead to an automated loop of materials design, manufacturing and testing of electrochemical devices. Prof Xuan will work with industrial partners from Siemens PSE, Intelligent Energy and Johnson Matthey. 

Prof Xuan said:  

“My ambitions for this research are huge and can only be achieved with long-term support like this. The flexibility offered to me through this fellowship will enable me to shape my research as findings emerge, following the solutions which reveal themselves through my work, in partnership with other academics and industry. I’m extremely grateful to the EPSRC for this support.” 

 President and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Surrey, Professor Max Lu, said: 

“Jin exemplifies Surrey’s values of inspiration and innovation. He is ambitious about solving global challenges, working collaboratively with interdisciplinary researchers and innovators. We’re very proud of him for winning this fellowship.” 

The High Court legal challenge into oil drilling at Dunsfold has been confirmed for June 8. The case will examine planning permission granted for exploratory drilling of £123million of oil near the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The UK Oil and Gas (UKOG) was originally refused planning permission to search for fossil fuels at Loxley Well in Dunsfold in December 2020 by Surrey County Council’s planning committee.

UKOG appealed in June 2022 after a public inquiry and was given the green light by the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, led by Surrey Heath MP Michael Gove.

Almost immediately, Waverley Borough Council challenged the appeal decision in the High Court with £13,000 set aside for the legal challenge.

In March this year anti-fracking campaigners celebrated the news that the case would be heard in the High Court after being granted a judicial review.

The June 8 date was pencilled in for the hearing, and this week it was set in stone after some discussion over potentially moving the date.

The case has been picked up by the Good Law Project and is being challenged on two fronts. The first, they argue, relates to the “inconsistency in decision-making by the Secretary of State” who approved Dunsfold drilling the same day he refused a comparable site in Ellesmere Port over greenhouse gas emissions. The second argument relates to the drilling site being on the edge of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and national policy requires planning decisions to give great weight to “conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty” in AONBs.

Good Law Project legal manager, Jennine Walker said: “Let’s be clear: exploiting our natural landscape for fossil fuels should be a thing of the past and is completely at odds with our crucial efforts to reach net-zero. This is why we are delighted to be supporting the next stage of Protect Dunsfold’s legal challenge which seeks to overturn the Government’s scandalous decision to overrule the local council and give the green light to a gas exploration scheme in the Surrey Hills.

“The High Court recently confirmed Protect Dunsfold’s case is arguable and we now look forward to the hearing in June at which we hope the Judge will overturn the Government’s scandalous decision”.

MP Jeremy Hunt said the plans should be “formally shelved” altogether.

A crowdfunding page has also been launched for those looking to support the legal challenge.

Related reports:

Surrey MPs oppose each other on drills in the hills

The Hills Are Alive With the Sound of Drilling… ?

Fractious Court case anticipated

Image: Residents strongly campaigned against an exploratory well (Image: Surrey Advertiser)

Sadiq Khan’s proposed ULEZ expansion to the Surrey border will be challenged in the High Court after a judge ruled there were valid legal arguments to be heard.

Five councils, including Surrey County Council, launched a joint legal bid against Transport for London (TfL) and the Mayor of London’s decision to expand the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) on a series of grounds including that it failed to comply with statutory requirements, that it unlawfully failed to consider compliance rates. and did not consult on scrappage schemes.

Other matters raised by lawyers in February 2023 were the lack of cost benefit analysis, inadequate consultation and apparent predetermination.

Now a judge has said there is “an arguable case” that the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has improperly handled the expansion decision.

Councillor Tim Oliver, Leader of Surrey County Council, said: “This is good news and I’m pleased that our challenge to the Mayor of London regarding ULEZ is proceeding. The impact on Surrey’s residents and businesses has been ignored by the Mayor and it’s frankly disgraceful that it’s taken legal proceedings to have our voices heard.

“Our consultation response in July 2022 clearly highlighted that the Mayor’s decision failing to include Surrey residents in any scrappage scheme was unacceptable, and proposed a number of other recommendations to help mitigate both the financial and potential environmental impacts of the expansion. Our concerns have not been addressed by The Mayor.

“We remain committed to delivering a greener future, but it must be done in a practical and sustainable way. We will now await the findings of the Judicial Review.”

Taking to twitter was Gareth Bacon, Orpington MP and one of the London boroughs that joined forces with Surrey. He said: “I am delighted that the five local authorities, including Bromley, challenging ULEZ in the courts, have won the first stage in their legal battle against Sadiq Khan’s decision. While the full legal case is still to be fought, today’s decision is a significant step forward. 

“The Court has decided that there is an arguable case that Sadiq Khan has improperly handled his decision to expand ULEZ across outer London. The Judicial Review will now proceed to a full hearing in the High Court. 2/5
“This means the Court believes there is an arguable case that the Mayor improperly handled the ULEZ consultation and failed to consult affected residents in neighbouring Home Counties properly.

“Sadiq Khan arrogantly dismissed this legal challenge like he ignored outer Londoners’ concerns during the consultation. He was wrong to do so, and this should be a wake-up call. He still has time to cancel ULEZ expansion and spare residents his £12.50 daily road tax.

“Congratulations on today’s success to Bromley, Bexley, Hillingdon, Harrow and Surrey councils, who brought this legal action. Like my constituents, I am pleased they have legally challenged ULEZ expansion, and I wish them every success in the upcoming hearing.”

The court case follows TfL’s November 2022 announcement that it would push on with proposals to expand the ULEZ scheme in August. It is understood that the High Court will sit to hear the matter in July. Should the court rule against the Mayor of London it has the potential to delay the August 29 expansion.

A spokesperson for the Mayor said: “The Mayor is pleased to see the court has refused permission for the majority of the grounds. We will continue to robustly defend his life-saving decision to expand the ULEZ and continue with preparations without delay. It is a shame that some local authorities have chosen to attempt this costly and misguided legal challenge instead of focusing on the health of those they represent.

“Around 4,000 Londoners die prematurely every year due to air pollution. This is a health emergency and the Mayor is not prepared to stand by and do nothing while Londoners are growing up with stunted lungs and are more at risk of heart disease, cancer and dementia due to our toxic air.”

Related Reports:

Surrey Council’s ULEZ talks ongoing with TfL

Can you beat the ULEZ charge?

Will Me’lud halt ULEZ expansion to Epsom borders?

A sign of no signs to come on ULEZ?

ULEZ will come to Epsom and Ewell borders

Yet more on ULEZ….

Epsom and Ewell residents see and hear planes flying to and from Heathrow Airport. They are usually at a height of 6,000 to 7,000 feet. A new consultation is out for everyone effected by flight noise and pollution from the main London Airports of Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. Chris Caulfield of LDRS reports generally on the topic and with reference to Gatwick in particular:

Communities living under the Gatwick flight path face trading off quieter modern aircraft for an increase in night flights. Current restrictions on night flights are due to expire in 2025 and the government is seeking views as part of its next night flight abatement policy. 

It says it is aiming to balance the impact of sleep deprivation with the benefits to the wider economy.

Aviation minister Baroness Vere of Norbiton said: “There’s no doubt night flights have an effect on local residents underneath busy flight paths, but as aircraft become quieter, we have an opportunity to strike a balance to make sure we can support the aviation industry without having a debilitating impact on people’s lives. This consultation will help us to shape policy and create a flightpath towards a more sustainable approach to night-time aviation noise.”

Currently about 16 aircraft, about 80 per cent of Heathrow’s night flights, land at the airport between 4.30am and 6am. At Gatwick and Stansted, which are in more rural areas, the figures are higher.

Overall Heathrow can have 3,250 total night flight “movements” during seven summer months and 2,550 during winter. At Gatwick that figure is far higher at 11,200 in summer and 5,150 in winter, with Stansted taking 8,100 and 5,600 respectively.

Paul Beckford, chairperson of HACAN group which acts as a voice for those under Heathrow flight paths, said: “We welcome the recognition of the health impact of night flights which is a shift in the right direction, but we are worried about the change in wording in the economic benefits.”

He said the 16 flights currently arriving before 6am were “the most disturbing” and had a cumulative effect on people. Any one flight could wake a person up “but the real problem is when there are more and more flights coming. You wait for the next one. You are woken up at 4.30am and then you know another one is coming.”

Most night flights, he said, were long-haul trips in demand for their cargo haulage but Mr Beckford suggested these could be reorganised into the normal flight schedule which would both preserve people’s restful nights as well as bring economic benefits.

He cited the drop in aviation traffic post pandemic and the increase in online meetings as reasons for there being greater flexibility in runway slots.

Mr Beckford also questioned the consultation being carried out before the results of the Dr Charlotte Clark report into the health impacts of night noise was published – due out in 2024/25.

Sally Pavey, chairperson of the Community Against Gatwick Noise Emissions, said the group was pleased to see the “long-awaited” consultation but that night flight, and the subsequent noise, was “much hated by residents and well documented to cause health issues”. 

She said: “We would like to see a ban on night flights at Gatwick Airport but we know that the airlines are far too powerful for this to ever happen no matter how many reports are produced by medical officials to the health impacts they have on those seeking sleep.

“The government needs to change its attitude towards aviation and seek to address this health risk that they are subjecting residents to every night in Surrey, Sussex, and Kent all the time they continue to allow holiday makers flying during the night. We can’t believe that bucket and spade travellers seeking all year round sun and leisure overseas really want to travel at night, so we can only keep up pressure on government and the airline to have night flights banned on health grounds.”

The six-week consultation is taking input and evidence from the aviation industry and communities before forming the backbone of to manage aviation noise from October 2025.

Once decided upon, the government said it will pursue the “most cost-effective measures for achieving the desired outcomes”.

Night noise at airports was last consulted on in December 2020 which resulted in rolling over existing restrictions from October 2022 to October 2025.

The consultation closes on May 9 and is available here.

Surrey County Council has spent more than £800,000 in pothole compensation payouts in the last five years but it hopes front-loading the road maintenance budget will help end the broken-road scourge.

In that time it repaired about 221,456 potholes along its rundown road network, at an average of 121 per day. It was also announced that the Government was to give the county £3million to tackle the problem but some say this is “just a drop in the ocean” compared with how much the road budget falls in future years.

County hall’s finances this year include a capital fund of £69.8million for highways maintenance as part of a front-loaded £188m that was announced in February. 

That is set to fall back to £29.5m a year – for the next four years – much more in line with the spending under its previous highways strategy which has led to the roads we have today.

It was also announced that individual councillor allowances of £100,000 to spend in their divisions would go, meaning any individual projects earmarked by members can not go ahead.

If highway’s can not be maintained, the opposition leader at Surrey County Council warned, then the roads will fall into further disrepair and the number of potholes, and motorists insurance claims, will rocket.

Councillor Will Forster said: “The cut to is to the road maintenance budget, this will mean the road surfaces will get worse. The cut is notable in the next financial year 24/25 and makes the £3m to repair the potholes from the Government look like a drop in the ocean.”

In 2018, Surrey County Council paid out £399,189 in compensation payments for claims relating to potholes – on both carriage and footway.

This declined to £135,949 in 2019 and was followed by two years where people were off the roads during the pandemic £83,415 and £79,364 in 2020 and 2021 – before climbing again as roads got busier in 2022 to £118,553.

These figures, the council said, relate to both property damage and personal injury with the “best endeavours” made to only include  compensation payouts, however, “some figures may also include elements of legal costs and disbursements.”

A spokesperson for Surrey County Council said the road maintenance, capital, budget agreed by council in February totalled £188m for the next five years. 

They added that the budget was front loaded, because work had been accelerated in order to realise the benefits sooner. 

Image: Potholes in Surrey (Surrey Ad)

Related reports:

On the Hunt for pothole repairs

Don’t blame us for potholes say Surrey’s highway authority.

Going potty about pot-holes?

The owners of a Surrey oil field have signed an agreement to “deliver increased production and revenues” that will allow it to focus on its Dunsfold site.

Environmental campaigners, however, are still holding out hope the Supreme Court stops the drilling.

Uk Oil & Gas (UKOG) announced to shareholders that it was to “farm out” production at Horse Hill to the US-based Pennpetro Energy.

The Texas firm is to takeover 12 kilometres at the site, just north of Gatwick Airport, at a maximum cost of £4.6m.
Announcing the tie up Stephen Sanderson UKOG’s chief executive said: “This mutually advantageous transaction will inject new activity into Horse Hill, aiming squarely to deliver increased production and revenues from the oil field. 

“The farmout enables UKOG to move this asset forwards without the need to raise capital, enabling our resources to be firmly focussed upon the appraisal and development of the Loxley gas discovery, our most material petroleum asset.  We look forward to a close working relationship with Pennpetro and a mutually successful future at Horse Hill.”

UKOG refers to its holdings at Dunsfold as its Loxley site and hopes to drill for £123 million of oil near the  Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty – pending its own High Court review.

Environmental campaigners who have been fighting against oil drilling at Horse Hill are still confident that the new company’s involvement will not change things materially.

In June the Supreme Court will sit for a legal challenge against Surrey County Council’s 2019 decision to grant planning for the four extra wells at Horse Hill. The same year the county also declared a climate emergency.

The application will go before the UK’s highest court after three judges were split in their findings –   that the county council’s decision to grant permission for 25 years of oil drilling and production was lawful.

According to UKOG the Horse Hill site has so far produced about 185,000 barrels of with approximately 1.362 million barrels still available.

Campaigner Sarah Finch of Redhill argues that the permission is out of touch amid the global climate crisis, 
Sarah Finch said: “We are taking legal action that is going through the Supreme Court in June.

“Currently the planning is subject to a legal challenge. There is still a possibility that the Supreme Court will not give it the go ahead. There has been low level production for a while there even though they got permission for expansion in 2019. I don’t think this new company’s involvement will change anything.”

Sarah started the campaign against the drill site on climate impact grounds -not just from the impact the drilling would have in the immediate area but the wider overall effect from burning the collected oil.

She added: “It will take us away from keeping climate change within limits. Horse Hill will just make hitting those targets more difficult. I’ve been concerned about climate change for a very long time and when a new oil well was proposed near my home I was horrified and we really needed to stop it going ahead. And it’s not just me, lots of residents have been involved. There have been a series of planning applications for the site but these four new wells were agreed in 2019, such a huge ramp up. That is why I decided it needed a legal campaign.”

The Supreme Court is due to sit on June 21 after the Court of Appeal reached a split decision.

Surrey County Council and Connected Kerb have agreed a contract to support the rollout of thousands of electric vehicle chargepoints across the county in the coming years. The contract, the largest in the UK to date, will release up to £60million of investment for Connected Kerb to install public EV chargepoints across the county. The aim will be to install thousands over the next five years and Connected Kerb have been licensed to operate the chargepoints for 15 years from installation.

_{Image credit: Andy Hughes.}

Increasing the number public chargepoints in Surrey will support residents who would like to switch to an electric vehicle (or already have done), but do not have a driveway to be able to install a chargepoint at their home. Through this contract, chargepoints will be installed at convenient on-street locations in residential areas and key locations in the community such as on high streets and public car parks.

Connected Kerb will install a mix of chargepoints, depending on location, to suit all needs. This will include slower 3kW and 7kW chargepoints, as well as fast 22kW chargepoints and, where suitable, rapid chargepoints. Their product range includes free-standing and wall-mounted chargepoints, which will cater to those with accessibility needs.

The partnership will see a rapid rollout of on-street charge points, with ambitious plans to install hundreds of charge points within the first year It aims to make one in five of the EV charging bays more accessible to drivers with disabilities, in recognition of the need to make EV adoption a practical reality for the 2.35 million blue badge holders on UK roads[i].

The recent Net Zero Review, published by the Government’s advisor Rt Hon Chris Skidmore MP, highlighted the opportunity for local authorities to take a leading role in the rollout of charging infrastructure. The partnership between Surrey County Council and Connected Kerb supports the delivery of ambitious EV charging infrastructure rollouts at the scale and pace needed to meet targets set by the government and to keep pace with rapidly growing EV adoption – up 40% in 2022 compared to 2021.

Throughout the contract, Connected Kerb will be identifying suitable on-street locations, using residents’ suggestions made through our online map, and approaching public sector and community land owners across the county to identify other suitable locations for public EV chargepoints, including local car carks, NHS sites and educational establishments.

Marisa Heath, Cabinet Member for Environment, Surrey County Council, said: “We know that emissions from transport are a significant proportion of our carbon footprint in Surrey, so supporting residents to switch to an electric car is essential to helping us achieve our aim of being a net zero county by 2050.

“Many residents don’t have access to driveways to charge EVs at home, so a comprehensive network of high-quality, reliable and accessible EV chargepoints is essential to supporting the needs of our local communities.

“We’ve been working with Connected Kerb for almost a year, as part of our pilot phases that have seen us install over 100 chargepoints across Surrey over the last two years. We’re delighted this contract will enable us to speed up the roll-out of further chargepoints and expand our network in the coming years.”

Chris Pateman-Jones, CEO of Connected Kerb, said: “If one local authority can deliver such a significant boost to the UK’s charging network, just imagine what we could achieve by 2030 if every city, county, and combined authority was empowered to do the same. The recent Net Zero Review was clear – local authorities can become the driving force behind the rollout of charging infrastructure across the country, and our partnership with Surrey County Council is case and point.

“If local authorities are the door to a clean transport future, then charging networks like Connected Kerb are the key, providing the tools and expertise needed to unlock the transition at the pace and scale required to reach net zero. Although the Government’s estimate of 300,000 chargers by 2030 may feel ambitious, it’s eminently possible – and necessary – to achieve; this deal proves it.”

In addition to the EV chargepoints, the contract will delivery significant value to Surrey residents through Connected Kerb’s social value projects. These will cover a range of initiatives including working with local educational centres to provide industry support to pupils interested in learning about EV chargepoints, providing employability support to vulnerable young people, as well as supporting a number of charities within the county.

• The contract enables up to £60million of investment to provide public EV chargepoints across Surrey
• Chargepoints will be installed at on-street locations as well as on other suitable public sector and community organisation managed car parks
• Partnership underlines findings of the recent Net Zero Revies which highlighted local authorities as the key to reaching the UK Government’s 300,000 chargepoint target

Surrey councillors have confirmed written communications are ongoing with Transport for London over the impact of the ULEZ expansion. Surrey County Councillor Robert Evans (Labour, Stanwell and Stanwell Moor) asked cabinet members at a full council meeting on Tuesday (March 21) to confirm that the mitigations the council was calling for would be followed up with the chancellor.

He claimed previous attempts to extend the Transport for London (TfL) Oyster card zone 6 in several Surrey boroughs had “floundered” because central government would not underwrite potential losses to the train companies.

_{Image: Ultra Low Emission Zone, Stonebridge Park. Credit: Will Durrant/LDRS}

Cllr Evans called on Surrey’s cabinet to “work with TfL and the Mayor of London to make sure that Surrey residents get the health benefits of this, but don’t get negative impacts if ULEZ comes into operation.”
The zone, which sees drivers of older, more polluting cars charged £12.50 per day to enter it, is due to expand to cover all of greater London from August.

The ULEZ currently covers central London and its expansion will see it border several Surrey districts and boroughs including Spelthorne, Elmbridge and Epsom.

In response to TfL’s plans to extend the zone, Elmbridge councillors previously called for the Oyster Card Zone 6 to be expanded further, highlighting the difference between public transport in London and in Surrey.
Cllr Evans said schemes in Bristol, Coventry, Birmingham and elsewhere had seen the government “pick up the bill for a scrappage scheme”.

The council’s cabinet member for transport, infrastructure and growth, Cllr Matt Furniss, (Conservative, Shalford) confirmed face-to-face meetings had been requested with TfL, but said he was “disappointed to say it only took the threat of legal action to get transport London to respond.” He said the council did “ask the government regularly for additional funding” and would be talking to them about the impact of the planned extension.

Meeting documents showed a virtual meeting took place between with TfL, county council officers and Elmbridge Borough Council officers on February 21.

A written response was received from TfL as a follow up to the meeting on March 7, which was being looked at and a response drafted from the council. The documents said: “The council is committed to delivering a greener future, but it must be done in a practical and sustainable way. …..The impact of an expanded ULEZ on many Surrey residents and businesses will be significant, and we will not stand by and watch that happen with no mitigation offered.”

During the meeting, Cllr Evans also reminded the scheme had been brought about by Boris Johnson, during his time as Mayor of London. Former Prime Minister Mr Johnson was London Mayor between 2008 and 2016, and announced the introduction of the world’s first ULEZ in London in 2015. It was introduced from April 2019.

A written response was received from TfL as a follow up to the meeting on March 7, which was being looked at and a response drafted from the council.

Cllr Buddhi Weerasinghe (Conservative, Lower Sunbury and Halliford) said he was supporting a campaign by residents to get Ashford and Sunbury stations, among others in Spelthorne, added to Zone 6. He also highlighted the needs of the expanding Shepperton Studios that he said had been put in a letter to government regarding its work force needing to travel to and from the studios by train.