Inquiry resumes tomorrow

Tomorrow the Inquiry into Gladman's bid to have up to 120 dwellings built at Little Heath resumes. This next session will be in the Carlsberg Suite at Crewe Alex's ground and proceedings start at 9.30am, Tuesday 13th May.

The morning will start with an informal round-table discussion*, we believe focussing on how many and who of Gladman's array of expert witnesses should be called.

On Day One of the Inquiry, last Wednesday, Cheshire East's barrister, Anthony Crean QC, asked that just two should give evidence and six should be excluded. It was clearly an attempt to focus on the areas of dispute only and to keep the Inquiry's costs down.

It's easy to sympathise with that view. Your correspondent has had many years of having to read scientific reports from experts on issues of contention. Years of one's life can be saved, he concluded long ago, by looking at the back of any report to find who paid for it. That tells you largely what it will say.

Without casting the slightest doubt on the integrity, qualifications or endeavour of Gladman's experts, we suspect that they have never found a Natterjack Toad, Great Crested Newt, threatened bat species or rare orchid on any field Gladman Developments has wished to concrete over.

Au contraire, read an export report commissioned by an organisation fighting such a development and the same field will be so overflowing with the very same threatened species to such an extent that they are in possible contravention of the Rural Overcrowding Act of 1723.

The attempt to limit costs, and the time spent with expert witnesses' evidence, seems all the more important given Anthony Crean's attempt late on Friday to agree with John Barrett, Gladman's counsel, a common stance on costs. While keeping his options open, Mr Barrett's response hinted that Gladman would be going for costs.

On Day One, Mr Barrett said that Gladman would be applying for an award of full costs on the grounds that Cheshire East Council had no justification in turning down Gladman's application.

The result therefore is, if costs were awarded to Gladman, that a speculative developer will have speculated at the expense of the taxpayer, a curious scenario which may raise the odd hackle. On that touchy subject, we shall look forward to how the debate and legal wrangling develops over the coming days.

*See separate story from Audlem Parish Council if you wish to raise a question in this discussion.

This article is from our news archive. As a result pictures or videos originally associated with it may have been removed and some of the content may no longer be accurate or relevant.