the price is right ... err, wrong

Presumably timed to coincide with the recent engagement events, Rescue the Cuckmere Valley – seemingly rebranded as The Cuckmere Valley Campaign and now referring to itself as an ‘environmental group’ – have been making noises in the local press again. In a statement by Alan Edgar, The Cuckmere Valley Campaign has re-launched its failed rescue proposal to raise the existing banks of the Cuckmere River.

Though marketed as a ‘new bid’ in The Argus, the plan is apparently the same one proposed in 2004 (see the plan – rescue the cuckmere valley) and thrown out under objection by Lewes District Council on two counts: the absence of a flood risk assessment and the absence of an ecological assessment. It is not clear from the articles in The Argus and the Sussex Express whether these objections have been addressed in the ‘new’ proposal.

One thing that is clear from the two articles, however, is the uncertainty about how much of a saving The Cuckmere Valley Campaign’s project will produce. In The Argus Alan Edgar claims that their costing of £900,000 should be offset against the Environment Agency’s planned £2.9 million scheme whereas in the Sussex Express he claims that the alternative will cost £18 million!!!

Seems to be a slight discrepancy there.

As Mr Edgar states in The Argus article: “It is a significant saving on the public purse. The other proposal is a big money scandal.” It seems to me however that the biggest scandal of all has been perpetrated by Mr Edgar himself as he attempts to mislead the public about the cost of the alternatives. In the two days between these articles he has changed the Environment Agency proposal costs by a mere £15.1 million. I wonder which one is correct – if indeed either of them are?