[🌎 Universal GB] General Discussion

[QTXAdsy]

Great news all around, these construction updates will be something to watch over the next few years.

 

[SeeSharpy]

If you are referring to MPs or national figures, I would suggest that silence does not necessarily equal consent, nor does it render a project "non-contentious".

It is easy to be broadly supportive of a hypothetical headline promising investment and jobs. It is significantly harder to scrutinise the minutiae of Green Belt development, environmental impact, and over half a billion pounds of state aid when the details are buried in a Statutory Instrument laid just as everyone is packing up for the holidays. The opposition hasn't formed because, until this morning, there wasn't a piece of legislation to actually oppose.

To classify a project that necessitates half a billion pounds of taxpayer funding, significant Green Belt development, and the executive overriding of local democratic planning controls as "non-contentious" is stretching the definition to its absolute limit.

The reason you haven't seen formal opposition from the relevant local elected body (Bedford Borough Council) is precisely because the SDO mechanism removes their ability to determine the application. They have been relegated to the status of a consultee. It is easy to claim a proposal is non-contentious when you remove the primary mechanism for contention.

I fear you've overlooked the specific constitutional hazard created by the "made vs laid" gap during a recess.

Yes, the 40 day prayer period clock pauses during the recess. This means the window for objection stays open longer on the calendar. However, the implementation date of January 12th does not pause.

When Parliament returns on January 5th, the clock for the SDO becoming active law will have nearly run out. The SDO will come into force on January 12th. The 40 day prayer period will effectively run until February.

This creates a scenario where the legislation becomes active law, and Universal can legally begin work, weeks before Parliament has finished its statutory period to object to it. If an MP tables a motion to annul in late January, they are trying to annul a law that is already in force and acting upon the real world. That is significantly harder, politically and legally, than blocking a law that hasn't started yet.

It turns the "fail safe" into a retrospective complaint box. It is a calculated move to ensure that by the time anyone gets around to objecting, the concrete mixers have already started pouring.

Looks like Universal will wait until the review period ends before starting

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has approved our request for planning permission to be granted by way of making a Special Development Order (SDO).

While there are still further steps to complete, including a statutory parliamentary review period, this decision represents another important milestone for the project. Our on-site activity will now gradually start to increase and we will share more information about project activity and construction in the new year.

 

[xtpower]

I think they'll continue prep works and ramp it up and then when Jan 12th or the review period ends they'll go full steam ahead.

 

[Dave]

It seems the Civil Service clerks have worked overtime to get the Statutory Instrument laid just 48 hours before the House rises for recess. That is impressively efficient, or desperate, depending on your view of the government's growth agenda.

There is a bit of a constitutional sleight of hand going on though.

An SDO is subject to the Negative Resolution Procedure. Convention dictates that a Statutory Instrument should be laid at least 21 days before it comes into force. With a laid date of 16th December and an in force date of 12th January, they have technically met that 21 day minimum.

However, the 40-day "praying time" (the window MPs have to table a motion to annul the order) pauses during recess (when the House is adjourned for more than four days).

Laying the SDO two days before Christmas recess, the "coming into force" clock keeps ticking (27 days total), but the "objection" clock freezes on Thursday. This means the SDO will become active law on January 12th, long before Parliament has had its full statutory 40 days to object.

Universal will legally have planning permission before MPs have even had a realistic chance to read the document, let alone debate it. It is executive railroading at its finest.

This creates a fait accompli. If an MP raises an objection in late January, the Order is already in force. The diggers could theoretically already be on site. It reduces Parliamentary sovereignty to a rubber stamping exercise, ensuring that a decision involving a heck of a lot of taxpayers' money and massive environmental impact bypasses both local democracy (via the SDO mechanism) and effective national scrutiny (via the timing).

Universal Great Britain is essentially being slipped under the door as everyone is looking at the Christmas tree. Whilst this will not be a problem for the vast majority of community members here, the lack of following proper conventional procedure leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.

I feel as though I may need to set the record straight here a little, as some of you may believe that I am bitterly against this development. I am not.

I welcome the Universal UK project and relish its reality, but I also value due process, scrutiny and democratic accountability. To rush through a decision of this magnitude, involving significant public infrastructure spending and environmental impact, via a Statutory Instrument laid just 48 hours before Parliament rises for Christmas, feels less like efficient governance and more like executive evasion.

I know there is a general consensus political parties don’t talk to each other but they do, I suspect the government knows this has broad support. For a start I believe the consensus is that MP’s that don’t neighbour the development don’t object (unless they feel the plan could impact business in their constituency). I would hazard a guess that the local MP’s have all been consulted and indicate that they are in favour.

I think it’s more likely they are confident in the support and didn’t see a need to delay, rather than a tactic to push this through, if it was the latter an MP would just table a motion of objection regardless (like Peter Bone who always created a division on all bills and amendments before Parliament to cause a vote). Just because they tabled the motion doesn’t mean it would fail, it would just force a vote.

 

[The_bup]

Just received this email:

“Good afternoon,

Today, we can share an important update on our plans to bring a new entertainment resort complex featuring a world-class theme park to Bedford. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has approved our request for planning permission to be granted by way of making a Special Development Order (SDO) and we would like to extend our thanks to them.

While there are still further steps to complete, including a statutory parliamentary review period, this decision represents another important milestone for the project. On behalf of the company, we want to express our sincere appreciation for the continued engagement from Bedford and the various communities surrounding our site, as well as the many other national and local stakeholders who have provided feedback and expressed such enthusiasm on the transformative nature of our project.

In the months ahead, we are committed to sharing progress as well as what to expect including job opportunities and how local businesses and suppliers can potentially work with us. The interest and support we’ve already seen from both local companies and residents has been incredibly encouraging.

In the meantime, please do continue to visit universalukproject.co.uk for relevant updates.

Kind regards,

The Universal UK Project Team”

Well, feels good to get the first scoop in doesn’t it! But please. Decipher for me.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

I know there is a general consensus political parties don’t talk to each other but they do, I suspect the government knows this has broad support. For a start I believe the consensus is that MP’s that don’t neighbour the development don’t object (unless they feel the plan could impact business in their constituency). I would hazard a guess that the local MP’s have all been consulted and indicate that they are in favour.

I think it’s more likely they are confident in the support and didn’t see a need to delay, rather than a tactic to push this through, if it was the latter an MP would just table a motion of objection regardless (like Peter Bone who always created a division on all bills and amendments before Parliament to cause a vote). Just because they tabled the motion doesn’t mean it would fail, it would just force a vote.

Whilst I appreciate that I may have over attributed a level of strategic brilliance to the government's scheduling, which could simply be a case of the Civil Service frantically trying to clear their desks before the Christmas party, the outcome of the scheduling remains the same and makes me uneasy.

Because the SDO comes into force just a week after Parliament returns, any debate or vote triggered by an objection will almost certainly take place after the legislation has already become active law.

Debating whether to approve a plan is very different from debating whether to cancel a law that is already in force. It shifts the burden from "Should we allow this?" to "Do we dare stop this thing that has already legally started?". It makes an objection significantly harder to carry politically.

Given the SDO status, the development has escalated from a mere local level of importance to a national one. I would imagine that the MPs for Staffordshire Moorlands, Kingston and Surbiton, Windsor, Runnymede and Weybridge, Tamworth, and Blackpool South (among others) would appreciate the full and proper window for proper parliamentary scrutiny, to analyse how the project could affect businesses in their constituencies.

By truncating the effective prayer period via the recess, the government has denied these representatives the opportunity to entertain a debate on whether such significant state aid constitutes fair competition before the legislative cement has set. They are being presented with a done deal, rather than a proposal.

I appreciate that Universal have since suggested that they will not begin any construction work until the prayer period is over, which does give the opportunity for the legislation to have the proper time for scrutiny, but legally they are not bound to.

 

[dave___]

Whilst I appreciate that I may have over attributed a level of strategic brilliance to the government's scheduling, which could simply be a case of the Civil Service frantically trying to clear their desks before the Christmas party, the outcome of the scheduling remains the same and makes me uneasy.

Because the SDO comes into force just a week after Parliament returns, any debate or vote triggered by an objection will almost certainly take place after the legislation has already become active law.

Debating whether to approve a plan is very different from debating whether to cancel a law that is already in force. It shifts the burden from "Should we allow this?" to "Do we dare stop this thing that has already legally started?". It makes an objection significantly harder to carry politically.

Given the SDO status, the development has escalated from a mere local level of importance to a national one. I would imagine that the MPs for Staffordshire Moorlands, Kingston and Surbiton, Windsor, Runnymede and Weybridge, Tamworth, and Blackpool South (among others) would appreciate the full and proper window for proper parliamentary scrutiny, to analyse how the project could affect businesses in their constituencies.

By truncating the effective prayer period via the recess, the government has denied these representatives the opportunity to entertain a debate on whether such significant state aid constitutes fair competition before the legislative cement has set. They are being presented with a done deal, rather than a proposal.

I appreciate that Universal have since suggested that they will not begin any construction work until the prayer period is over, which does give the opportunity for the legislation to have the proper time for scrutiny, but legally they are not bound to.

The MP for the constituency where the park is going to be actually raised a point of order about the notification today in parliament because he wasn’t told, but found out it was approved from the Facebook post of the Labour MP in the constituency next door.

He’s supporting of it all anyway but party politics already in play it seems.

 

[BSwiss]

…but found out it was approved from the Facebook post of the Labour MP in the constituency next door.

Sanbrooke in the mud.