You may well have seen Mr Godfrey Spanner, Managing Director of Onslow Suffolk Ltd, on TV last week bemoaning that the SnOasis project is coming off the rails because of a minor wording glitch in the planning consent. That is absolutely not the case and once again we have the usual spin rather than substance pumping out through the media. 

The facts are these: Planning permission was given for the SnOasis, housing and railway station development on a number of conditions. One of these was that the development had to proceed as an integrated whole, thus preventing the developer from 'cherry picking' the bits that were financially attractive. That is where the much discussed word 'all' comes from and was an entirely proper condition laid down by the Secretary of State. The bleat that this is holding up the Snoasis development is entirely misleading - Onslow are indeed seeking to 'cherry pick' the development by asking Mid Suffolk Distract Council to let them proceed with some of the housing - so the impact on SnOasis is entirely erroneous. Mr Spanner is now petitioning the Prime Minister for help and we need you to write to Gordon Brown explaining the real facts - see below. 

The background here of course is that the project is in deep trouble. Onslow is saddled with debt; the Irish company to which 70% of Onslow Suffolk shares were sold last year is in liquidation; one of their directors is being sued for millions of pounds, at least one other director has a record of company liquidations and the chairman of Onslow Suffolk, Sir Jeremy Hanley, has resigned. Secondly, the planned development of the old cement works site for housing by Persimmon Homes has collapsed and thirdly, Onslow still have not applied for detailed planning permission despite a review team at Mid Suffolk District Council having been assembled in January. We also hear that, allegedly,  Onslow owes £130,000 to Snowsports GB who originally endorsed the project - you will remember the skier Konrad Bartelski waxing lyrical on its benefits - and wonder if we will hear any more glowing endorsements from them!  

For the developer to now claim the detailed design work will take him a further two years and delay the project is sheer humbug for he has, by his own admission, been working on this project for some 7 years and was always fully aware of the amount of work involved in submitting the detailed application. This looks like yet another case of the developer crying wolf and seeking public and media sympathy! Any attempt at local or national government level to fundamentally change the conditions upon which planning permission was granted, will almost certainly result in a judicial review being called for and the Community Alliance will continue to monitor the situation.  

Even if they had the money, Onslow Suffolk can't start work because they have yet to come up with a plan that persuades Natural England to issue a licence to remove the large numbers of legally protected greater crested newts from the site despite being in discussions with them for 4 years: neither have other outstanding legal issues on the site been resolved. And can it really have been an oversight that 21,000 tons of brick rubble have been mysteriously dumped into one of the most prolific great crested newt breeding ponds on the SnOasis site. Suffolk Police are investigating this incident to establish whether a criminal offence has been committed - we await the outcome with great interest especially as the developer has consistently professed to be environmentally friendly and have the interests of wildlife close to his heart !  

We should remind ourselves that there is no similar scheme to SnOasis operating successfully. Michael Jolly CBE, former CEO of Europe's' largest leisure park operator, the Tussauds Group, described the SnOasis concept as a 'non starter' at the public inquiry. Even a cursory look at the SnOasis scheme shows that it could never make money: to be viable, it is estimated the scheme needs at least 4 times the number of visitors than planned to be profitable. This lack of financial viability was ignored by the planning inspector and the Secretary of State but because SnOasis generated good headlines it was still nodded through. But to generate jobs, even the low paid ones claimed by SnOasis, it has to be a successful business venture and that seems very unlikely to happen. 

If you would like to help push this barmy scheme finally over the edge of a quarry, please take the time to write to the Prime Minister at the address below. Unfortunately our PM is no longer accepting e-mails but you might also like to copy Hazel Blears, Community Secretary of State who will have to deal with the issue. You need to tell them that you object to any easing of the very proper restrictions placed on the development at the time that planning g permission was granted and indeed, given the parlous state of the developer's finances, these are even more important than when they were first imposed. You might like to also inform the PM and Ms Blears that any attempt to ease the conditions would be challenged in the High Court with a judicial review.  

Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown MP

10 Downing Street

London

SW1A 2AA

Rt. Hon Hazel Blears MP

Department for Communities and Local Government
Eland House
Bressenden Place
LONDON
SW1E 5DU

e-mail: - blearsh@parliament.uk