Representation by Gwen Erskine-Hill
- Date submitted
- 25 September 2020
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Suffolk coastal simply doesn’t have the infrastructure to cope with an industrial project of this size nor the amenities to support 8000 workers. It is a rural backwater geared for agriculture, tourism and retirement. 6 fallacies 1. "The environment, the area of AONB, SSSI and RSPB minsmere will not be damaged". You cannot build a massive structure over 45 hectares of land for 12 years creating 30 meter high spoil heaps and expect the surrounding area to remain unaffected. “The Appraisal of Sustainability has found that there is the potential for some long lasting adverse direct and indirect effects on landscape character and visual impacts on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB, with limited potential for mitigation.” National Policy Statement for Nuclear Power Generation (EN-6) Volume II of II – Annexes 2. "The road network is more than sufficient to handle the traffic for the biggest industrial project in the UK" The A12 is already at critical levels of pollution and the B1122 is a narrow country B road yet it is expected to take more traffic than some motorways. The proposed bypass of some of the B1122 is ill thought out with no legacy value and will do nothing to alleviate the suffering of the people unlucky enough to live on the B1122. 3. "Great local employment opportunities". Indeed there are - for low skilled jobs such as cleaning and catering! The skilled workforce will be imported from Hinkley and other parts of the country. The demographics of the immediate area mean that there is very little unemployment to start with. Local businesses may be forced to close as the staff are poached for higher wages by EDF. This includes anyone connected to tourism and, worryingly, care homes. As for creating opportunities for employment further afield people are not prepared to commute for an hour each way when the shifts are 10 or 12 hours long, never mind the 90 minutes EDF suggests is possible. 4. "Big boost to the economy of the area". Zero evidence of that in either Leiston or Saxmundham who have allegedly benefited from the presence of Sizewell A and B. 5. “well-managed and effective mitigation package via a Tourism Fund” They suggest that a tourism fund will keep people coming to Suffolk Coast area. I fail to see how as there will be no accommodation left for tourists, no staff to work in the tourism sector and who wants to come to an industrial site for their holidays? 6. "The area can cope with the influx of workers". The numbers EDF are quoting fail to take into account the numerous other major energy projects proposed concurrently for this area. This alters the number of workers coming to the area, the volume of traffic on the roads, the amount of accommodation available and adds to the strain on existing amenities. The EDF workforce alone will be more than double the population of the nearest town, Leiston.