22nd December 2006, 04:11 PM
Ok 1desk so the situation is that previously and currently the majority of ESs are not put on the web yet although we would like them to be and if they are not to be put on the web the costs could be massively reduced by using CDs/DVDs and of which there has been the occasional example if you ask the right question to the right person (often someone in opposition). Sounds so reasonable. Some of the distribution problems have to do with copyright of ordnance survey maps but I suggest that there has been from the outset of EIAs an instinct to not make ES easily accessible. I find nothing wrong with that instinct, I think that the adversarial nature of our law far superior to frog law, it is just that I would prefer that it should be stated loudly that all is propaganda in ESs so those in opposition to a scheme should approach ESs in a much more combative manner than they do
Here is an example of the very latest amendment to an EIA regulation, an attempt by our cuddly civilo serviceo to enjoin the public. I would suggest that it quite clearly has no intention of imaging that the web exists and is no different for all the other EIA regs. If any of the developers distribute web data they do it from a position of ascendancy.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si2006/20060618.htm
one less newspaper and a sign on a stick with the sea somewhere in the background-not a mention of any easier access to the actual ES!
This âmassiveâ concession came about after UN conventions and the EU Arrhus convention for.... wait for it: Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making, and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters!!!!Had they spotted how the civilo serviceos had shot ahead and left the public without something on a stick?
You might imagine that these notices are for a bit of ditch digging somewhere but in fact they are the main regulation for a 2 billion coastal defence fiasco heavily intent on a disgraceful marine dredging(unEIAed crown agent world) environmental disaster. What you thought that they should have come under SI1999/293
Here is an example of the very latest amendment to an EIA regulation, an attempt by our cuddly civilo serviceo to enjoin the public. I would suggest that it quite clearly has no intention of imaging that the web exists and is no different for all the other EIA regs. If any of the developers distribute web data they do it from a position of ascendancy.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si2006/20060618.htm
one less newspaper and a sign on a stick with the sea somewhere in the background-not a mention of any easier access to the actual ES!
This âmassiveâ concession came about after UN conventions and the EU Arrhus convention for.... wait for it: Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making, and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters!!!!Had they spotted how the civilo serviceos had shot ahead and left the public without something on a stick?
You might imagine that these notices are for a bit of ditch digging somewhere but in fact they are the main regulation for a 2 billion coastal defence fiasco heavily intent on a disgraceful marine dredging(unEIAed crown agent world) environmental disaster. What you thought that they should have come under SI1999/293