Jeremy Hunt has declined to comment on government plans to allow oil and gas drilling in his constituency in the heart of the Surrey stockbroker belt, as a judicial review of the decision was heard at the high court.
The chancellor of the exchequer previously opposed proposals, approved by the government last year, to sink an exploration well near the village of Dunsfold, Waverley, in the midst of the Surrey Hills.
After judges in March granted permission for a judicial review of the decision, Hunt said he was disappointed plans “for drilling on this beautiful area” had not been scrapped, placing him in the unusual position of opposing a decision by his own colleagues.
But he kept silent as a challenge was heard at the high court in London on Thursday morning, not responding to requests for comment from the Guardian.
Dunsfold sits on the Weald basin, a topographical region stretching across south-east England that has been a source of coal and gas for 150 years, and is estimated to still contain hundreds of thousands of tonnes of oil.
UK Oil & Gas (UKOG), a hydrocarbon exploration company focused on exploiting the area’s remaining reserves, has leased a plot of land in open countryside where it has applied to bore two holes to explore for oil deposits.
Permission for the well at Dunsfold was granted last June by the housing minister, Stuart Andrew, in the face of fierce local opposition and despite two refusals by councillors on Surrey county council’s planning committee.
Opponents of the scheme gathered outside the Royal Courts of Justice before the judicial review hearing on Thursday morning, holding banners declaring “No future in fossil fuels” and “Don’t drill Dunsfold”. The International Energy Agency has said there can be no new fossil fuel extraction projects if the world is to stay within 1.5C of global heating.
Activists believe the outcome of the hearing could have significant implications for future on-shore fossil fuel projects going through the planning permission process.
Chris Lindesay of the activist group Protect Dunsfold, which opposes the scheme, said he believed Hunt, who began supporting their campaign from the backbenches last year, was still on their side, in spite of his silence. “We went to see him a couple of weeks ago, as Protect Dunsfold, and briefed him on what has been happening.
“He is kind of on the other side now, and it’s difficult for him. He’s not allowed to talk to the minister who is behind this – he’s a bit frustrated by that because he’s quite supportive but he can’t come out in public.”
The high court challenge has been brought by Protect Dunsfold, supported by the Good Law Project and Waverley borough council. They argue the decision to allow drilling at Dunsfold is inconsistent with a decision, taken on the same day, to refuse a similar application for a site in Ellesmere Port because of the greenhouse gas emissions it would produce.
A second argument relates to the site being on the edge of Surrey Hills, an area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB). National policy requires planning decisions to give weight to “conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty” in AONBs.
But Lindesay said his and other local campaigners’ opposition was not confined to the specific circumstances at Dunsfold. “In principle I am opposed to drilling anywhere,” he said. “Now I’m a grandfather, I’ve got four grandkids, [and] in 60 years’ time they will be asking ‘Why did grandad not stop this?’ I feel the weight of that quite heavily.”
Jennine Walker, legal manager at the Good Law Project, who was also at court on Thursday, added: “It’s a scandal that the government ran roughshod over Surrey county council to give the scheme the green light. Even the local MP, and now chancellor, Jeremy Hunt has spoken out against the decision.
“UKOG’s plans to drill the Dunsfold site will see irreparable harm to the natural habitats and landscape on the edge of the Surrey Hills area of outstanding natural beauty, as well as producing significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions.”
Walker added: “We hope that success in the high court will put a stop to this and also make it more difficult for similar schemes to gain approval in the future. This high court challenge is not only a must-win for the Dunsfold community; the UK’s vital efforts to tackle the climate emergency also hang in the balance.”
The hearing continues.
