We store cookies on your device to make sure we give you the best experience on this website. I'm fine with this - Turn cookies off
Switch to an accessible version of this website which is easier to read. (requires cookies)

Vandals attack Stonehenge World Heritage Site

December 5, 2020 8:30 AM
By Stonehenge Alliance
Originally published by Trevor Carbin Liberal Democrat

Stonehenge by Vera CarbinSecretary of State Grant Shapps, has overruled the clear conclusion of the Examining Authority at the Stonehenge Inquiry, that the Highways England scheme was incompatible with the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site, as indeed the scheduling body, UNESCO, had itself concluded.

Having asked an independent body expensively to examine the evidence for a scheme, and then overruled the conclusions with a justification which is flimsy to the extent of arbitrariness, is an outrageous negation of government responsibility. It needs to be tested by law. The Stonehenge World Heritage Site organisation has launched such a testing action. Please see the Press Releases below.

Alongside this is the launch of a Crowdfunding appeal to pay for this action. Please support this appeal and please pass this message on to any sympathisers you know or any appropriate environmental group contact lists you have.




Legal action launched on Stonehenge road decision

Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site, a new organisation set up by The Stonehenge Alliance, has instructed counsel and Leigh Day to investigate the lawfulness of the Secretary of State's decision to approve the A303 Stonehenge dual carriageway. A letter has been sent to the Department for Transport outlining its concerns.

To make this possible, campaigners are launching an appeal on CrowdJustice to raise £50,000 to cover the initial costs of the legal action.

The decision by Grant Shapps to approve the road on 12 November, despite a recommendation by the Examination Panel that it be refused, sent shock waves around the world.

Tom Holland, Stonehenge Alliance President, expressed his backing for the legal action:

"I fully back the move to test whether Grants Shapps acted legally in approving this highly wasteful and destructive road scheme. The Government has ignored advice from both UNESCO and the independent panel who presided over a six-month examination. To have won the arguments based on reason and evidence, and then to have them overruled on a ministerial whim, shows just how broken the roads approval process is.

"I urge everyone who cares about the Stonehenge World Heritage Site to support this legal action. There is still a chance to stop the bulldozers moving in and vandalising our most precious and iconic prehistoric landscape.


Legal bid to save Stonehenge landscape from A303 road tunnel bulldozers

A legal bid has been commenced to try to prevent a two-mile road tunnel being built for the A303 alongside Stonehenge.

Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site (SSWHS) has asked Leigh Day solicitors, working with Victoria Hutton (39 Essex chambers) and David Wolfe QC (Matrix chambers), to investigate the lawfulness of the decision to approve the A303 Stonehenge dual carriageway, which includes a cutting and tunnel entrance through the western part of the World Heritage Site.

SSWHS is a new organisation set up by individuals involved with The Stonehenge Alliance. It has launched a fundraising campaign to pay for the legal action.

Leigh Day has sent a letter to Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, who gave the go-ahead for the eight-mile road project that includes the tunnel, putting him on notice of potential legal action. The department will be asked to respond within 10 days, and any judicial review will need to be started by 24 December.

Mr Shapps authorised the Wiltshire road project despite the recommendation of five expert inspectors, the Examining Authority (ExA) who examined the application by Highways England for the Amesbury to Berwick Down Development Consent Order under section 37 of the Planning Act 2008.

Mr Shapps agreed with the ExA that the development will harm spatial, visual relations and settings on the 4,000-year-old World Heritage Site, but concluded that the level of harm would not be substantial and would be outweighed by the public benefit.

At the public inquiry, the Stonehenge Alliance and a number of other parties argued that the World Heritage Site ought to be treated as a single heritage asset and protected in its entirety. However, Mr Shapps is reportedly satisfied the Development has been designed to accord with the National Planning Policy Statement for National Networks (NPS) and that reasonable mitigation has been included to minimise harm to the landscape.

SSWHS argues in its letter that Mr Shapps adopted an unlawful approach to the consideration of harm to heritage, his reliance on the advice of Historic England was misplaced, the reasons for his conclusion on heritage harm were inadequate and unintelligible, and his actions are in breach of the World Heritage Convention (WHC).

The group says the NPS, the policy basis that the Secretary of State must use when making decisions for nationally significant infrastructure projects, is clearly directed at preservation of the heritage asset.

The group says the WHC does not allow for a cost-benefit approach to the assessment of harm and that it is irrational to conclude that the physical destruction of one part of the 4,000-year-old World Heritage Site can be offset by possible future benefits to other parts of the site.

Leigh Day solicitor, Rowan Smith, said:

"Our client believes that there is a legal case to be made that the Secretary of State unlawfully assessed the harm that is going to be inflicted on a 4,000-year-old and much cherished World Heritage Site, deciding instead that such destruction is a price worth paying for the economic benefits and faster road travel times that may accrue in the future.