Time to Release the ‘Dartmoor Document’

How South Hams can use its Freeport influence

South Hams Council has been told by its representative member on the Plymouth & South Devon Freeport board (PASD) that it is better to influence the Freeport by ‘being in it’ than ‘outside of it’. Unfortunately, there has been precious little evidence of this so far.

This emphasis on the importance of ‘influence’ has implicitly given oxygen to many residents’ fears that the Freeport is a vehicle for private companies to gain, whilst the public loses out. It’s a narrative that suggests it is only the presence of South Hams as ‘the good guys’ who can keep the Freeport on ‘the straight and narrow’.

This ‘reassurance’ of ‘safe hands’ has not been helped by the fact – time and again – this influence is proved to be a fallacy. South Hams continues to allow public money to ping pong from Freeport project to project, shuttling millions on paper between Sherford and Langage, and at times not even highlighting to its own councillors significant additions such as an underground hydrogen pipeline supply to lower Dartmoor china clay mines or power supply issues at its proposed Langage Freeport tax-site power plant.

Critically, South Hams influence has failed to provide any release of the ‘Dartmoor Document’ that contains the full reason the Freeport’s 75km outer boundary takes in most of Dartmoor.

‘Compelling’ Document – but what’s in it?

Incredibly, neither residents, councillors, not even Dartmoor National Park itself (!) has been allowed sight of the Freeport bidding document that was submitted to government outlining the ‘clear economic rationale’ with ‘compelling evidence’ and a ‘robust economic case’ behind the inclusion of Dartmoor within the Freeport’s 75km outer boundary. Submitted in the original bid, it was clearly a compelling document. It convinced UK Government to allow a ‘regulation-busting’ 75km boundary to encircle Dartmoor (the maximum boundary allowed was 45km).

Source: HMG Freeport Bidding Prospectus Guidance

Source: HMG Freeport Consultation Guidance

A ‘statement’ – but no document

Plymouth & South Devon Freeport has given an account of the reason for Dartmoor’s inclusion – in their own words. It begs the question, why not simply publish the sections of the document that relate to Dartmoor and this 75km boundary?

This statement from PASD was read out by the South Hams rep. member for the Freeport (Cllr John Birch) in council, stating:
“We have three tax sites in our Freeport…and these all sit within the outer boundary which…broadly indicates the area they expect to benefit most directly from the Freeport’s economic impacts. The government tracks the impact of each Freeport’s activity using the geographic parameters of the outer boundary as a reference point.
However, it is not the case that the entire area within the outer boundary has been earmarked for development. The outer boundary does not confer any special planning or regulatory status (and does not undermine the special status of protected landscapes such as National Parks) and Local Authorities within it retain all their statutory powers and responsibilities, including responsibility for providing planning permission.”

Dead Cats on Dartmoor

Did you see it? Did you see the dead cat just drop from the sky?
There is no actual response in this statement on WHY Dartmoor was included. There was no reference to the COMPELLING ECONOMIC RATIONALE. A 45km boundary as stipulated in the bidding document rules (and not 75km) would easily have sufficed for the ‘impact tracking’ reasons stated (and what would these ‘impacts’ be for Dartmoor, anyway??)
Until the Freeport, we wouldn’t have had to contemplate potential customs sites across an outer boundary in the first place. But, now it’s here (without consultation), we are reminded of many terrible planning developments that should never have been permitted, but somehow were. Would planning decisions on Dartmoor really be any better?
But the ‘planning’ bit is just a ‘dead cat’ in this respect.
Let’s let it bounce and move on, to ask simply- WHY?

WHY not just publish the ‘Dartmoor document’?

If there is no issue with the rationale, nothing to hide, nothing to worry about, why not release the actual ‘Dartmoor Document’? If it is that ‘compelling’ and ‘robust’, we should certainly know about it. After all, why keep such a great economic miracle for Dartmoor secret?

No one would ever agree to a sale of their house based on an ‘interpretation’ of the contract from the buyer. Why should we – the residents who are bankrolling this project and allowing an arbitrary boundary to be drawn- be expected to support something, the ‘contract’ of which we have never been allowed to see?

And has South Hams’ ‘influence’ succeeded in getting its councillors, residents or Dartmoor National Park sight of this document? No.

And that’s despite the fact that South Hams has always been a part of the Freeport arrangement as a ‘Founder Member’ – and will have agreed this ‘Dartmoor Document’ in the first place.

‘Perceived’ concerns – a meeting with the Freeport team?

The CEO of Plymouth & South Devon Freeport – Richard May – and his team have invited me to a meeting to help allay my ‘perceived’ concerns. I have asked for a number of documents that they could provide in advance in order to allay these concerns. One of these is the ‘Dartmoor Document’. If they refuse to provide this, then what next?

This isn’t about doubting someone’s word. It’s about gaining clarity- without an organisation making a presumption on what information they feel would be suitable to release. We are told Plymouth & South Devon Freeport is of great benefit to the public. So let’s see why.

And of course, there’s the other elephant in the room: that no ‘perceived’ concerns were ever allayed by claiming ‘nothing to see here’ whilst simultaneously withholding vital documentation.

Failing its own test

South Hams District Council, meanwhile, fails its own test in terms of ‘influence on transparency’. The council has turned down multiple requests for public information on the Freeport. The Council’s self-proclaimed ‘influence’ could have been used to demand information for residents from the Freeport, but instead it seems it has been the council itself that has decided to decline them.

It makes no difference what ‘influence’ or ‘reserved rights’ South Hams claims to have as a founder member if in practice the council fails to demand the Freeport release vital documents on behalf of its residents, national park, protected landscape and concerned community organisations.

If South Hams really is serious about influence, the starting point must be securing the public release of the ‘Dartmoor Document’ itself- with immediate effect.

It could be the last chance for the council to prove its worth and ‘influence’ under a new administration- before the public make up their own mind about who is influencing who, and what it says about the whole relationship.

– See also my other recent articles on the relationship between South Hams District Council and Plymouth & South Devon Freeport: Cuts, Costs & Questions

Give us your thoughts in the comments below and contact your local councillor to ask for the release of the ‘Dartmoor Document‘, and why it is so hard to obtain.