Issue - meetings

To consider the following Motion submitted by Councillor Bennett

Fracking

This council

a)    Opposes fracking in the borough of Sefton, or fracking outside its borough, which could affect residents within our borough and call upon the government to reconsider its policy on fracking and to impose a moratorium on shale gas in the UK because:

·       This council considers it has a responsibility to tackle climate change and protect the environment and the wellbeing of local communities

·       This council acknowledges that exploration of unconventional fossil fuel undermines action on climate change and diverts resources away from investment in a safe and secure renewable energy future

·       This council considers that fracking has the potential to spoil our countryside and adversely affect our wildlife and habitat. 

·       This council notes the potential impact of fracking on highway safety, wildlife and habitat, visual impact, noise, air and geological issues related to mining;

b)    Note that given the ecological importance of many sites in Sefton to include SSSi’s and RAMSAR sites that any adverse effects relating to community, environmental, transport and health impacts of fracking need to be demonstrated beyond any doubt that any adverse affects can be eliminated;

c)     Commits to not allow any fracking activities, including survey work, on Council owned or controlled land and property;

d)    Requests that our officers take all reasonable steps to ensure that the environment of Sefton and the amenity of its residents are protected;

e)    Will support renewable energy in Sefton, particularly solar farms and off-shore wind turbines, where these are in keeping with local character. Fracking will only be supported if there is substantive evidence to demonstrate that it comprises sustainable development that the local community needs; 

f)      Notes that there are identified significant adverse impacts from shale gas exploration and exploitation, including water contamination and air pollution; 

g)    Requests the Chief Executive to write to Central Government to urge and request that they establish an overarching single body responsible for all aspects of fracking to remove the ability for various bodies to pass control of certain issues to other organisations; 

h)    Will take such action as necessary to protect the community’s interests where impacts of proposed unconventional oil and gas development, otherwise known as fracking, pose a threat to water resources, adversely affect traffic movements or require the movement of hazardous waste through the borough of Sefton; and

i)       Hopes that our commitment to cleaner, renewable energy in the future will show the rest of the country how important it is to protect our environment for future generations and to allow us to stand together with other forward thinking Local Authorities and urges other likeminded Councils to pass a similar Motion.

It was moved by Councillor Bennett and seconded by Councillor Gannon:

Fracking

Whilst we, as a Council, have previously passed a motion on fracking, we do not feel that this goes far enough.

This Council acknowledges the increasing growing public concern that unconventional gas extraction entails significant risks to the environment and to the health and wellbeing of neighbouring communities. These include, but are not limited to, earth tremors, potential air pollution, pollution of water resources and increased industrialisation of the countryside. There appears to be insufficient regulation and scrutiny of current unconventional gas extraction operations in the UK and as a consequence these operations risk irreversibly polluting fragile water courses and established nature and tourism activities.

The Council further recognises that fracking may have a detrimental effect on house prices, as well as building insurance within the vicinity of fracking wells.  Additionally, an investigation by Greenpeace found that many fracking licenses have been issued to companies linked to offshore tax havens, raising questions about the purported economic benefits of shale gas extraction and any potential tax benefits to the Treasury.

There is also concern that exploration and extraction of fossil fuels by unconventional means can undermine investment in a safe and secure renewable energy future. The Conservative Government have been diverting incentives and investment away from renewable energy sources, while at the same time encouraging and supporting non-renewables such as fracking.

It is the duty of this Council to protect the health and wellbeing of residents and the integrity of our natural environment and to play its part in supporting sustainable energy for all our future generations. Evidence  that fracking is dangerous to health, the environment, climate change, and all the other risks, is now so strong that many countries do not allow it including Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland who actually have the presumption against fracking “enshrined in planning policy”.

The list of places banning, or refusing to permit, fracking is increasing all the time.  At the last check places that had done this either permanently or temporarily (e.g. issued a moratorium) included: Ireland – banned, France – banned, Netherlands, Germany, Bulgaria – banned, Spain – voted to ban and regional bans, The state of Victoria (Australia) banning unconventional gas; moratorium on conventional onshore gas

In the U.S., the country that has most experience of fracking the following states have banned fracking: New York State, the state of Vermont, the state of Maryland, Beverley Hills – the California Municipality built above the Beverly Hills Oil Field, the town of Denton, Texas, “the birthplace of fracking” although this was later overturned by the governor of Texas.

In a report by Public Health England, Review of the Potential Public Health Impacts of Exposures to Chemical and Radioactive Pollutants as a Result of the Shale Gas Extraction Process, Health officials said their initial review suggested the risks to people’s health were low - but only so long as the process is “properly run and regulated”, however evidence from the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82