The list below is a record of advice the Planning Inspectorate has provided in respect of the Planning Act 2008 process.
There is a statutory duty under section 51 of the Planning Act 2008 to record the advice that is given in relation to an application or a potential application and to make this publicly available. Advice we have provided is recorded below together with the name of the person or organisation who asked for the advice and the project it relates to. The privacy of any other personal information will be protected in accordance with our Information Charter which you should view before sending information to the Planning Inspectorate.
Note that after a project page has been created for a particular application, any advice provided that relates to it will also be published under the ‘s51 advice’ tab on the relevant project page.
Advice given between between 1 October 2009 and 14 April 2015 has been archived. View the archived advice.
The Sizewell C Project View all advice for this project
Dear all, I am writing to object to the very unsatisfactory nature of the Sizewell C consultation. I have spoken to over 50 Suffolk residents who overwhelmingly say that their petition signing and objection letters against Sizewell C have been quietly swept aside. Out of those 50 only 4 were in favour of Sizewell C (mainly because they believed the much peddled notion that the 'lights will go out without nuclear power',but they were nevertheless very concerned about nuclear power) The rest were strongly against and it is my belief if the people of Suffolk were laid out the facts and figures clearly and honestly , the majority of Suffolk would be against Sizewell C. We really don't believe the lights will go out. How does one explain that the following counties either don't have nuclear power or are confident enough to begin the phase out of it and replace it with renewables ?: Italy, Australia, Austria, Estonia, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Lichtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Israel, Serbia, Malaysia, Norway, Japan, Scotland , New Zealand, Belgium, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden etc. The objectors felt strongly that nuclear power is far too unsafe in terms of the legacy of toxic waste, rising sea levels, terrorism etc. In Suffolk we object strongly to the large scale destruction of AONB and SSSI's. Beleagered nature/wildlife must be prioritised for preservation.The severe damage to Minsmere in terms of road and infrastructure building ,light pollution etc etc. Also the severe effect that will have on the successful Suffolk tourism economy based on Heritage and Nature. Finally we see all this destruction as unneccessary, we have renewables growing rapidly. We need to see solar panels on buildings-everywhere.There are some good large scale domestic shemes which can bring down the installment costs. Wind farms, solar farms, tidal. Also bringing local jobs. Personally, I think also we all need to view energy as a far more precious resource. In my childrens school windows are flung open regularly to let out the heat, in the middle of winter-I think this is common place in businesses etc. We need to put on a jumper rather than reaching to turn up the heating dial. If people feel they can make a difference with their own panels or as part of a scheme, I believe they start to use energy more responsibly. In short ,we the people of Suffolk are overwhelmingly against Sizewell C , and we do not feel that our voices are being heard. Yours suncerely, Clare Rizzo
Dear Ms Rizzo, Thank you for your email expressing concerns about the adequacy of the developers consultation and consultation material. We note that you have sent your letter to the developer and the local authorities. The local authorities can consider your comments as part of their Adequacy of Consultation Representation submission to the Planning Inspectorate (on behalf of the Secretary of State) at the Application Stage of the process. The Planning Inspectorate will consider any adequacy of consultation representations received from the relevant local authorities when deciding whether or not to accept the application, as required under section 55(4)(b) of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended). It is therefore important to ensure the local authorities are informed of your concerns. Further information about Community Consultation can be found here: attachment 1 As you are aware the proposed application by EDF Energy is at the Pre-application stage of the Planning Act 2008 process. The Planning Inspectorate is unable to consider representations about the merits of any application until it is accepted for Examination. Further information about the process can be found in the link below to the National Infrastructure Planning website: attachment 2. Should the application be accepted the application and all the supporting documentation will be published on the project page of the National Infrastructure Planning website: attachment 3. The ‘Registration and Relevant Representation form’ will be made available here during the Pre-examination stage and all parties will have an opportunity to outline their views about the project. The appointed Examining Authority will then use these to carry out an initial assessment of principal issues. Further information about registering as an Interested Party can be found in the Planning Inspectorate’s ‘Advice Note 8.2: How to register to participate in an Examination’: attachment 4. I hope the above information is useful to you. Kind regards, Liam