Government will not review decision on solar farm near Guildford
The government will not review the approval of plans to build a solar farm on green belt land near Guildford.The University of Surrey was granted permission to build the facility on a 43-hectare site west of Blackwell Farm, Hog's Back, in November.Godalming and Ash MP Jeremy Hunt, who requested the approval be reviewed by the government, said he was "disappointed" by the Secretary of State's decision not to call it in.The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been contacted for comment.
Hunt said in a social media post he was "disappointed" to receive confirmation that Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner had decided the application would not be called in for determination.He said he, along with Compton Parish Council, had requested the review due to the prominence of the site and because some of the land had been recommended for inclusion in the Surrey Hills National Landscape as a part of an expansion consultation.The letter from the government department said Rayner was content that the decision should be made by the local planning authority, Guildford Borough Council.Hunt added that the deadline for the Surrey Hills National Landscape ended in December and he was awaiting confirmation of next steps from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
A spokesperson for the University of Surrey said the application "was never likely to be called in" and that the council's decision came at the end of an "extensive and consultative" 18-month planning process.They added: "Our project is firmly in line with local and national planning policy priorities. "We regret the three-month delay, but now look forward to proceeding with our plans to deliver clean, green energy for our campus." The Students' Union submitted a letter of support for the application, but about 100 local residents and 15 other groups had sent letters of objection.Guildford Borough Council has been contacted for further comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Daily Mail
Reeves claims she's balancing the books - but sky-high bond yields tell a different story, says ALEX BRUMMER
The Chancellor's spending review is being billed by Labour as a signal moment for a government that is haunted by banana skins of its own making. It paints events as a moment for national renewal after 14 years of Tory chaos. It is nothing of the kind. An analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies shows, despite the hype and hand-outs for favoured constituencies, Rachel Reeves barely moved the dial on capital investment spending. All she did was maintain capital budgets, such as those for science and tech, at the same 'high' level of national income as Jeremy Hunt, the most recent Conservative Chancellor. IFS's director Paul Johnson doesn't pull his punches. He says if anyone was 'baffled' by the Chancellor's speech 'so were we'. He goes on to suggest that it wasn't a serious effort to provide useful information to anybody. It also exposed Reeves's ineptitude in framing arguments. There was no attempt to elevate and explain the spend, with focus on the white heat of technology, in terms of the nuclear, digital, and biotech revolution which will change Britain forever. Instead, there was revived talk of 'securonomics' (buried since Labour has been in office) and misleading crowing about the state of the economy. The boast that the UK was the fastest-growing economy in the G7 in the first quarter of the year was accurate. But as Reuters reported yesterday it was a case of 'pride comes before a fall'. Reeves and her team must have had early sight of the April growth data which showed output shrank by 0.3 per cent. A big factor was Trump's tariff war, which caused car, steel and other exports to stumble. One might have thought someone at the Treasury, or a special adviser, might gently have suggested the G7 comparison was a rhetorical trap which might have been avoided. The April data may be rogue because of Trump tariff uncertainty. The Government hopes the trumpeted trade accord with the US will soon come to fruition and the UK's upmarket car makers – Jaguar Land Rover, Bentley, and Rolls-Royce and the more eclectic Mini – will soon be back to normal business. However, it will take time for the logistics and supply chain to be revised. The downturn also was partly the result of policy. The end to concessions on stamp duty predictably produced a lull in home sales, despite the good househunting weather and the easing of the bank rate. Tax does make a difference. It is not wise for a government making a big bet on the housing market to bypass it as a recovery tool by punishing homebuyers, especially younger people seeking the first rung on the ladder. There is one G7 table which Rachel Reeves didn't mention. The Chancellor believes her fiscal rules, which require current spending to be matched by taxation but allow borrowing for investment, have secured the UK's budget after the Liz Truss disorder. Markets don't believe it. The yield on Britain's ten-year bond – or gilt – at 4.5 per cent in latest trading is the highest among the rich Western democracies. Reeves makes the reasonable case that UK yields move in lockstep with those in New York. There is, however, a serious flaw in the thinking. The Chancellor appears to believe that if the current budget is in balance, it is fine to borrow to invest. That may be the case in Japan and Germany, where bond rates are 1.46 per cent and 2.53 per cent respectively, because their governments' overall interest bill is, by UK standards, under control. In Britain's case, every pound that is borrowed for a new roundabout or bypass behind the Red Wall comes with interest at high rates. So the extra borrowing for Labour's £2 trillion or so of capital spend inflates the current budget via borrowing charges. In the autumn, the Treasury estimated the interest bill for 2025-26 at £126billion. If gilts had a similar yield to the German bund there would be an extra £60billion or so for education, health or even an end to the freeze on income tax thresholds which punish hard work and enterprise. Britain's national accounts do not provide a free pass for capital projects.
South Wales Argus
2 days ago
- South Wales Argus
Homeless charity welcomes scrapping of Vagrancy Act
The Ministry of Housing, Local Government and Communities has announced that the UK government will scrap the Vagrancy Act, a law in place since Georgian times. Homeless charity Crisis, along with other homelessness organisations and politicians in England and Wales, has been calling for the act to be consigned to history books. It has remained in place despite a Westminster vote to repeal it in 2022. Crisis has also welcomed a new draft law in the Senedd, which seeks to improve homelessness prevention and support in Wales. Debbie Thomas, head of policy in Wales at Crisis, said: 'No-one should be punished for being pushed into homelessness. It's critical that people who are experiencing the trauma of homelessness feel able to reach out for support from authorities – not fear them."
Telegraph
4 days ago
- Telegraph
Mark my words, we're headed for a monster debt crisis
All things fall apart. Orders, whether domestic or geopolitical, eventually collapse. So too do monetary cycles, typically rising and falling every 80 years or so. The big cycle that began in 1945 is coming to a close as the bond markets begin to crack. Bookmark this piece: a debt crisis is coming. Let me explain what's happening. The yield on government debt is the measure of how much interest people expect to receive to lend the government money. This goes up when the market loses confidence in the government's economic plans or think the Chancellor is going to borrow plenty more. We saw yields shoot up under Liz Truss. But after Rachel Reeves's budget, yields on the UK's 30 year bonds peaked at 5.58 per cent, up from the previous 4.99 per cent peak on the worst day of the mini-budget fallout. More worryingly, the term premium, which is the part of the yield which prices the additional risk that borrowers are taking by holding the Government's long-term debt, has risen far more sharply in the UK than in America, Germany and many other developed countries. If Reeves thought Liz Truss crashed the economy, how would she describe her own failure? The markets have concluded that Reeves's plans to stimulate growth are thin – indeed, fatally contradicted by her jobs and investment destroying tax rises – meaning she will inevitably turn to yet more borrowing to fund huge spending splurges. Borrowing for the year 2024-25 was forecast to be £87 billion in Jeremy Hunt's budget of March 2024, but over this financial year Reeves's Treasury has spent £152 billion more than it received in revenue. To put this in context, in 1976 when the UK was bailed out by the IMF the national debt to GDP ratio was running at 50 per cent. Now it is around 100 per cent – and unfunded public sector pensions take it to over 200 per cent of GDP. That's before you include huge, unquantified liabilities currently swept under the carpet, like nationalising the rail and steel industries. Some will paint my warnings as fearmongering: haven't we been in worse straits before? After WW2, UK government debt peaked at around 270 per cent of GDP and dropped steadily to 50 per cent over 30 years. The truth is that we are now uncomfortably close to that level of debt, but unlike those post-war decades we have no growth to manage our way out of it. The financial repression that was possible post-war required capital controls and fixed exchange rates under Bretton Woods. Today, aggressive measures of this kind would only lead to capital flight, currency depreciation and all manner of other knock-on effects. How might this crisis unfold? Typically in a bond market crisis the most indebted countries are targeted first by bond vigilantes who sell their bonds, force their prices down and the premium up. Buyers of newly issued bonds dry up, demanding ever higher yields. The UK is exposed and the markets sense it. The US has certain advantages as the world's reserve currency, but even it is heading for trouble. In Washington, the latest debt fuelled spending spree has attracted fierce criticism from the likes of Elon Musk. If passed it would set the US on a path to record debt. Even the world's biggest economy cannot be immune from the laws of fiscal gravity forever. So worried are some in Trump's circle that in the so-called Mar-a-Lago Accord and elsewhere, Scott Bessent, now Secretary of the Treasury, and others considered how the US could reduce debt by devaluing the dollar, and even renegotiating debt to force down its liabilities. The backdrop to this is a highly unstable geopolitical world. A quarter of our debt is foreign held. China and other adversaries hold many of the cards. Not that there are friends when it comes to the markets making decisions. As Truss discovered, when there is a loss of confidence in a government's ability to service debt, markets ruthlessly intrude upon democratic government. They effectively dictated the reversal of almost all measures in the mini-budget and removed a Prime Minister. A future debt crisis would see the markets demand spending cuts of a magnitude and scale we've never known before. They will despatch Reeves back to her old job in customer relations in no time. The woman who once preposterously posed as the Iron Chancellor is now seen by the markets as a spendthrift with no growth plan – and unable to resist the unaffordable demands of her backbenchers. Egged on by Nigel Farage, she wants to fork out billions more on benefits by lifting the two-child cap. The economic growth needed to fund this debt boom is not materialising – she is funnelling money to the public sector and crushing the private sector, the engine of growth. Industrial energy prices are now the highest of any developed country, decimating the ceramic, petrochemical, glass and car industries. If Reeves can't persuade the markets she has a plan, and quickly, yields could rise even higher. She is dancing on the edge of a precipice. Of course, the roots of the present challenge go back some way. Covid lockdowns and the money printing that paid for them cast a long shadow. Unlike many who cheered the opening of the spending taps, I warned in Cabinet of the inflationary impacts and sought to run a tight ship in my department. Even before the pandemic hit, the Bank of England's QE had created the illusion that deficits could be financed without end, and that hard trade offs could be avoided. That was fantasy economics. The UK will hit the rocks if we don't change course. There is too much debt because there is too much spending. Labour may try and offset that with more taxation, but they can't do that without crushing growth altogether. If you thought you knew the depth of anger and resignation about the mismanagement of the country, you haven't seen anything yet.
