"probably the most prolific anti frack website in the UK"
- Ken Wilkinson - prominent pro-fracking activist and industry supporter (Yes we know , he doesn't know what "prolific" means does he)

Defend Localism!

Take the advice of Greg Clark, ex-Secretary of State for the Department for Communities and Local Government

Greg Clark

"Those who are prepared to organise to be more effective and more efficient should be able to reap substantially the rewards of that boldness ...

Take power now. Don’t let yourself, any longer, be ruled by someone else"

How many wells?

Click the image from more information on Cuadrilla's plans for PEDL 165

Fracking Employment

From the Financial Times 16 October 2013

AMEC forecast just 15,900 to 24,300 nationwide - direct & indirect

Jobs would typically be short term, at between four and nine years

Only 17% of jobs so far have gone to local people


Looking for misinformation, scaremongering, lies or stupidity?

It's all on this website (but only on this one post ) featuring the Reverend Mike Roberts.

(Oops - there's more! )

Here though is our favourite Reverend Roberts quote of all time - published in the Lancashire Evening Post on 5th August 2015

"If you dare oppose fracking you will get nastiness and harassment whether on social media, or face-to-face"

Yes you!

"Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing's going to get better. It's not." - Dr Seuss

We are not for sale!

England is not for sale!


Join the ever growing number of households who have signed up to the Wrongmove campaign!

Tell Cuadrilla and the Government that your house is "Not for Shale"


Be a flea

"Many fleas make big dog move"
Japanese Proverb quoted by Jessica Ernst

No to Fracking

Love Lytham Say No to Fracking

Make sense?

The Precautionary Principle

When an activity or occurrence raises threats of serious or irreversible harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.

Contact Us

Click here to contact us by email
Private Eye

How can I help?

Find out here

Email updates

Subscribe to our mailing list

Follow us on Twitter

Our Tweets

Unwelcome Visitors

Cuadrilla are trying to claim today that fracking will result in a tourism boom for Lancashire.

They even shipped over a bombastic B&B battleaxe from Yorkshire to try to make their point for them.

However, it won’t.

How do we know?

Why because their planning expert witness told us just that at the Blackpool Inquiry last year (as reported on the Drill or Drop website).

Robin Green, the barrister for Roseacre residents, put it to Mr Smith: “You said it was possible jobs could be lost in the tourism sector but this was likely to be short-term. It was speculative and unquantifiable and linked to public perception of fracking.”

Mr Green asked why the impact on tourism jobs would be short-term.

Mr Smith said: “In the longer term, when the industry is established and people are aware of the actual impacts, tourism will recover.

He suggested that perceptions would change because the company had assessed the impacts of fracking to be minor and negligible.

Mr Green suggested:

“Come to Lancashire home of fracking that will have the tourists flocking”

He put it to Mr Smith:

“There is no evidence that the public are moving towards acceptance of fracking as an industry.”

Mr Smith replied

“I don’t have any evidence. There may be evidence but I don’t have the knowledge”.

Mr Green said:

“As a tourism draw, fracking is unlikely to be up there as draw.”

Mr Smith replied: “There is no evidence of fracking having an impact, I have not seen the evidence.

Even the government’s own most optimistic assessment of the impact of fracking on tourism is that it will be broadly neutral. Their conclusion is that losses from tourists avoiding the area due to shale gas operations may perhaps be off-set to an extent by increased hospitality to new workers.

If the US experience is indeed replicated here in Lancashire as Lancashire For S(h)ale suggest it will be, what we *can* expect to see are significant increases in employment for sex workers, drug pushers and policemen, along with an increase in STDs, car crashes, drug-related crimes, and sexual assault.

Fracking flares are really not going to be the new Blackpool Illuminations whatever Cuadrilla might want you to believe!

Cuadrilla’s incredible vanishing act

Most of us are by now aware that there were two significant earth tremors in the Fylde in early 2011, which coincided with Cuadrilla’s fracking at Preese Hall. It seemed for a while that as reported by the Daily telegraph in 2011 that “Cuadrilla admits drilling caused Blackpool earthquakes” and by the Blackpool Gazette that “Drilling did cause ‘earthquake’”

Cuadrilla’s own Senior Geoscientist, Huw Clarke, appeared to admit as much in a co-authored research letter which concluded that;

The fault was reactivated by the hydraulic fracturing in a strike-slip mode because of its steep dip and optimal orientation relative to the current stress field, elevated pore pressure, high-stress anisotropy, all of which resulted in a high slip tendency.” (Our emphasis)

How strange then that when the Daily Telegraph posted an article on Cuadrilla’s mounting financial losses (Cuadrilla cuts costs to stem losses as shale project faces further opposition) they should have to edit it to remove a reference to Cuadrilla having caused the earth quake.


What was even stranger though was the fact that a factual and polite comment pointing to Mr Clarke’s research letter was deleted.

After 3 deletions I got a little more pointed

This of course got deleted too.

So why, we have to ask ourselves are Cuadrilla so keen on removing all reference to these tremors from public discourse? After all they previously seem to have been prepared to admit that they were their responsibility?

And why is a supposedly reputable paper like the Daily Telegraph apparently prepared to both kowtow to Cuadrilla’s demands in this way and also to remove any references to evidence that questions their position?

Could it be that as they approach the point where they hope to start fracking that Cuadrilla are so worried about the prospect of causing a further quake, which would surely result in a ban for their industry even from this supine government, that they are attempting a sort of Stalinist revision of history?

To be honest I find both their and the Telegraph’s actions quite incomprehensible here.

Cuadrilla’s incredible shrinking supply chain Part 2

Back in April we noticed that Cuadrilla had failed to issue and update in 2017 Q1 as promised, and commented that we’d noticed an apparent reduction in the number of companies claimed to be registered on the supply chain portal.

On 31st May Cuadrilla finally released an updated “quarterly” tracker (that’s a full five months into 2017) covering the period to 31st March.

Aside from the interesting increase in community funding, which still doesn’t seem to be winning them many friends, the most striking difference is indeed the downward trajectory of their supply chain portal registrations.

For this to be the case presumably 283 business must have actively de-registered between 1st December and 31st March.

Perhaps the local business community is starting to see that the leprechaun’s pot of gold at the end of the fracking rainbow is not worth chasing after all?

If Cuadrilla would like to offer any alternative explanation we’ll be happy to publish it here.

Manifestly wrong

Theresa MaySo we now know what the Conservative Party has in mind for fracking if they get re-elected in June. Or at least we know what they would like us to believe they will do, as a manifesto promises from the Conservative Party haven’t always been reliable.

Here is the passage from the manifesto dealing with shale gas:

Natural gas from shale

The discovery and extraction of shale gas in the United States has been a revolution. Gas prices have fallen, driving growth in the American economy and pushing down prices for consumers. The US has become less reliant on imported foreign energy and is more secure as a result. And because shale is cleaner than coal, it can also help reduce carbon emissions. We believe that shale energy has the potential to do the same thing in Britain, and could play a crucial role in rebalancing our economy.

We will therefore develop the shale industry in Britain. We will only be able to do so if we maintain public confidence in the process, if we uphold our rigorous environmental protections, and if we ensure the proceeds of the wealth generated by shale energy are shared with the communities affected.

We will legislate to change planning law for shale applications. Non-fracking drilling will be treated as permitted development, expert planning functions will be established to support local councils, and, when necessary, major shale planning decisions will be made the responsibility of the National Planning Regime.

We will set up a new Shale Environmental Regulator, which will assume the relevant functions of the Health and Safety Executive, the Environment Agency and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. This will provide clear governance and accountability, become a source of expertise, and allow decisions to be made fairly but swiftly.

Finally, we will change the proposed Shale Wealth Fund so a greater percentage of the tax revenues from shale gas directly benefit the communities that host the extraction sites. Where communities decide that it is right for them, we will allow payments to be made directly to local people themselves. A significant share of the remaining tax revenues will be invested for the benefit of the country at large.

So let’s look at what they say and see what it means shall we? The introductory paragraph paints a rosy picture of the US shale gas industry. Whilst is is indisputable that increased volume of natural gas in the USA has exerted downward pressure on prices, the narrative above totally ignores the huge influence that OPEC countries strategy over the last five years has had on oil and gas prices. It is generally accepted that, because the European gas market functions as a discrete entity that over here there will be no significant downward pressure on wholesale or consumer gas prices as a result of fracking. Even Cuadrilla themselves admit as much. Their ex-Corporate Development manager, Mark Linder, told Greenpeace in 2013 – “We’ve done an analysis and it’s a very small…at the most it’s a very small percentage…basically insignificant”.  Lord Browne, ex chairman of Cuadrilla said broadly the same “”We are part of a well-connected European gas market and, unless it is a gigantic amount of gas, it is not going to have material impact on price“.  Pinning an energy strategy strategy on the hope that, against all the evidence, UK produced shale gas will lower prices looks rather desperate, but that is clearly what the Conservatives are trying to do here.

Then we have the greenwash – “because shale is cleaner than coal, it can also help reduce carbon emissions“.  It is indeed generally agreed that burning gas is cleaner than burning coal, but reducing carbon emissions is only part of the story as far as climate change mitigation is concerned.  As has been frequently pointed out, the issue of fugitive methane emissions in the process of shale gas extraction and production means that shale gas’s much vaunted “cleaner” climate change profile may be very questionable indeed.  The Conservatives’ apparent concern for this issue would be more credible if there were a single reference to “Carbon Capture and Storage” (CCS) somewhere in the document.  Perhaps, though, this would have been a little embarrassing as they broke a previous manifesto pledge when they cancelled their £1bn competition for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology just six months before it was due to be awarded back in 2015.

So, based on the very shaky premises that UK shale gas production will result in US style price reductions, and that it will help to mitigate climate change in the absence of CCS, the Conservatives “will therefore develop the shale industry in Britain“. Note the the word “therefore“.  Their reasoning is as clear as it is fallacious.

They admit next that there are severe challenges in achieving their goals

We will only be able to do so if we maintain public confidence in the process, if we uphold our rigorous environmental protections, and if we ensure the proceeds of the wealth generated by shale energy are shared with the communities affected.

Those difficulties are rather greater than might be assumed from the way the text is written. They are not in a position to “maintain” public confidence as it doesn’t exist at present. According to the government’s own polling half as many people again oppose fracking as support it. Equally they are not in a position to “uphold” rigorous environmental protections which don’t yet exist. Of the 10 recommendations made by the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering only 1 (the seismic traffic light regulation) has been brought forward so far. They need to create the rigorous environmental protections before they can uphold them. As for sharing the proceeds of the wealth generated by shale energy, we know from the consultation in late 2016 that “The government is proposing a contribution of 10% of all shale gas tax revenues collected to be distributed under the Shale Wealth Fund“. However the same document tells us that “tax revenues are driven by profitability; the profitability of any site is dependent on fuel prices, operator costs and site-specific geology“. They still haven’t explained how, with UK extraction costs forecast to be between 46p and 102p a therm and futures prices for natural gas being consistently below 46p a therm in the foreseeable future, the industry will make any profit to pay any tax on. Without those profits there can and will be no “proceeds of the wealth generated by shale energy“.

Notwithstanding the logical fallacies above, the Conservatives now appear to be prepared to trample over their previous commitments to “localism” and are clearly intent on ensuring that no planning process can stand in the way of the shale gas juggernaut that they wish to unleash onto the North of England.  Initial (pre-fracking) development applications will be waved through and local councils will have “expert planning functions” from central government standing behind them to ensure that they make the “right” decisions. It should also be noted that as the government was clever enough to redefine “associated hydraulic fracturing” based on the volumes of fluid used, certain hydraulic fracturing developments would now be classified as “non-fracking drilling” and so would be “treated as permitted development”. This policy appears to have more holes in it than a Swiss cheese!

In case this isn’t enough “major shale planning decisions will be made the responsibility of the National Planning Regime” which clearly implies that they will be treated as “nationally significant infrastructure projects“. This has two main implications – firstly the likelihood of such an application being turned down, say on the grounds of traffic disturbance or safety as at Roseacre Wood are very slim indeed, and secondly it means that the time-scales for determination are much more strictly defined, so no extended enquiries or appeals would be expected.

We will of course still be allowed to write in with our comments regarding the applications, but even the thousands of objections received for the applications submitted so far start to look futile, given the clear intention to override local impacts and force this industry onto unwilling communities by removing decision making from local councils.

The promise of a new Shale Environmental Regulator must have come as something of an embarrassment to our local MP here in the Fylde, Mark Menzies, as he has been congratulating himself since 2013 on having got us “a body to oversee the industry’s various regulators” (He was, of course, referring to OUGO.)

Even Mr Menzies seems to have realised by 2015 that OUGO was no real sort of independent regulatory body as he asked the following question in parliament

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, if he will bring forward legislative proposals to establish an independent (our emphasis) panel to oversee the regulation of the shale gas industry.

The then Energy Minister, Matthew Hancock, refused to consider this stating: “The UK already has a strong regulatory system which provides a comprehensive regime for exploratory activities”. However, here we are with the Conservative party now belatedly accepting that the current regulatory regime isn’t fit for purpose (or maybe that should be “quick enough at passing decisions”). You should note that the rather important word “independent” used by Mr Menzies above does not feature anywhere in the description of this putative new regulator, so this looks as though it is yet another attempt  to streamline regulation and promote the industry.

And finally, like a dog returning to its own vomit we see the Conservatives just can’t stop themselves appealing, for the second time in just this short passage,  to the greed of potential voters by dangling the prospect of a bigger juicier bribe, to be paid directly to those that want it. (Although it should be noted that they are reserving the right to make the “desolate North” suffer but preserve a share of any benefits for “the country at large”). Of course a “greater percentage” of zero is still equal to zero, so, as we have pointed out above, unless they can work out how shale gas can be extracted at a profit in the UK then this is the emptiest of empty promises.

So all in all this is a prospectus for a disaster for large swathes of the North of England, built on false logic, bad economics and naked self-interest.  If you live anywhere near the Bowland Shale then a vote for the Conservatives is a vote to suffer all of the potential impacts that have been identified with shale gas extraction, whilst the alleged “benefits” being dangled in front of us look very suspect and tawdry indeed.

Of course one good thing is that, as shale gas extraction will rather obviously make local housing less attractive and therefore less valuable, local people’s contribution towards the proposed “dementia tax” will be a little lower than it otherwise might have been. Every cloud as they say ….

Snap Judgements

We received the following press release today and feel that it deserves to be read:


Local documentary photographer unfairly targeted by police after covering an anti-fracking demonstration for nine minutes.

A photographer has been unfairly targeted by police after covering an anti-fracking protest in Greater Manchester.

Oldham-based Peter Yankowski-Walker, 53, was arrested in Horwich, Bolton, on February 28, 2017 nine minutes after arriving at a demonstration outside AE Yates, a company who have supplied oil and gas exploration firm Cuadrilla with a drilling pad for their controversial fracking work in Lancashire.

While photographing the demonstration, Yankowski-Walker was arrested for obstructing a public highway – after almost being knocked down by on of AE Yates trucks. He was held in a prison cell for 10 hours before being charged. Yankowski-Walker believes he has been unfairly targeted by police because of a government crackdown on journalists sympathetically covering anti-fracking demonstrations.

At his subsequent appearance at Bolton Magistrates Court police presented the criminal record of another man as Yankowski-Walker’s, a mistake they later admitted – yet the same incorrect criminal records was presented at a second court date in Manchester nine days later.

Peter Yankowski-Walker does not have a criminal record.

During his police interview after his arrest, Yankowski-Walker said police tried to coerce him into admitting guilt; he claims this excessive form of policing is part of a government-led attack on protest and suppression of information surrounding fracking.

Peter Yankowski Walker said: “I am trying not to be paranoid, but when sat in a dock after not even committing a crime and to see the effort to prosecute someone for something so trivial is mind blowing and a waste of taxpayers money. Especially as the incident was live-streamed and completely backs up my statement.

“The judge demanded the Crown Prosecution Service remove the wrongful criminal record from my file – but he decided to take my case to a full day’s trial, using as evidence against me body cam footage from four directions. This was pushed forward by two representatives from the Crown Prosecution Services.

“Independent photographers and film-makers are seeing a trend unfolding as in the last few months the police have stepped up their arrest rates on anti-frackers. Valued footage has helped cases to clarify that no wrongdoing occurred and it seems now, those who document and provide evidence are being targeted too. Photojournalists, documentary film-makers and live-streamers have contacted me to say that that they are experiencing less tolerance by the police and more oppression, whist collecting evidence and imagery of social change.

“I feel that my case is being treated more seriously because of the links with documenting the protest against hydraulic fracturing than it would be if it was another subject. I am honour-bound however to continue to do my job; unbiased grass roots reporting is essential in providing a balanced picture.”

Yankowski-Walker under the name Peter Walker is due to appear before a district judge at Manchester and Salford Magistrates Court, Crown Square, M60 1PR Time 9.30am May 15th, 2017.



February 28, 2017 – Peter Yankowski-Walker is arrested at demonstration outside AE Yates in Horwich, Bolton.

March 7, 2017 – Bolton Magistrates Court. False criminal record of Yankowski-Walker to magistrates. Yankowski-Walker visits Bolton police later who agree that false records were presented in court.

March 16, 2017 – pre-trial, Manchester. Police again present false criminal record of Yankowski-Walker to district judge.

May 15th, 2017 – due to be appear before district judge at Manchester Magistrates Court.



Images of Peter Yankowski-Walker are available upon request. Email: vital.media@ntlworld.com

Contact Peter Yankowski-Walker:

Email: vital.media@ntlworld.com

Mobile: 07486 858656 home number 01706 661 646


You can see some of Peter Yankowski’s images here:

Big issue: http://www.bigissuenorth.com/news/2017/03/tidal-wave-force-fracking/

Drop the Drill: https://drillordrop.com/2017/03/03/protest-weekly-update-27-february-5-march-2017/

Salford Star: http://salfordstar.com/article.asp?id=2673

The Canary http://www.thecanary.co/2017/03/09/first-telegraph-lied-now-police-use-gratuitous-violence-quiet-lancashire-village-video/

Primrose Bank, Past, Present and Future. Social documentary photographic book.



Peter Yankowski-Walker has a Masters in International Photojournalism, having trained with one of Britain’s best know social documentary photographers: Ian Beesley at the University of Bolton. Peter is well known by many for his iconic imagery, documenting the anti-fracking protests in the North West over the last three-and-a-half years. The images will be published in a photo documentary book.

His images have been shared all over the world and have appeared in many magazines and online news journals.

Yankowski-Walker added: “I feel that unrestricted social documentary photography gives a balanced view of contemporary social history as it unfolds, a perspective that is essential to freedom of expression and democracy.”

Cuadrilla’s incredible shrinking supply chain

After the hullabaloo they made about the launch of their Community Commitments Tracker it was surprising that Cuadrilla have failed to update it as promised on a quarterly basis.

Could the reason be embarrassment?

In the launch version they claimed that in November 2016 they have 715 Lancashire based businesses registered on their supply chain portal. The next update will of course have to tell us how many are registered now.
How interesting therefore to read a Big Issue article that states

Recent direct action by campaigners against supply chain companies has brought some success in persuading them not to do business with Cuadrilla.

and in which UKOOG’s Corin Taylor states that

Cuadrilla has 400 local companies registered on its portal to be notified of contracts. There is definitely an interest in this industry from the local supply chain.

So it would seem that they have lost nearly half of the 715 they had registered in November.

We look forward to reading the next version of Cuadrilla’s Community Commitments Tracker with great interest.

It was also interesting to read that Corin chose not to mention his own ludicrous 74,000 jobs estimate in this article, preferring to quote a lower Ernst & Young figure. If even he won’t stand by his own work, who else will?

Watching the Defectives

So, with the usual PR fanfare Cuadrilla announced their shiny new environmental measurements portal.

We are glad that they are at least acknowledging the potential impacts of their activities, but we don’t really think it’s appropriate they they seem to be being left to mark their own homework here.

Interestingly Page 10 of the government response to the Energy and Climate Change Committee’s Fifth Report of Session 2010–12 states that :

The environment agencies do not monitor air quality at unconventional gas operations unless there are specific permitted activities on site (e.g. large scale refining or combustion of gas) however it may make recommendations as part of the planning application process to ensure operations’ designs allow appropriate management of emissions to air.

Local authorities also have a statutory duty under the Government’s Air Quality Strategy and Local Air Quality Management process to monitor and assess local air quality. If necessary local authorities may take action to reduce emissions in the event that they might risk contributing to any breach of air quality standards.

So we would like very much to know what LCC are doing at the moment to fulfil that statutory responsibility with specific reference to the area around the PNR site. Leaving it to Cuadrilla to put up a few pretty graphs that don’t even state which month they are showing is not fulfilling it is it?

In the meantime given that Cuadrilla can’t manage to keep the simplest of promises relating to public information (Remember the Lancashire Commitments Tracker that was going to be published every 3 months but hasn’t been updated since November?) we will not be holding our breath to see if they manage to do better with this one.

As the toothless officers at LCC were reported as saying at the recent community liaison group meeting that LCC cannot enforce breaches of the traffic management plan whilst trucks are being brought in under police convoy, we don’t have a great deal of faith in their capabilities either.

Is this really the gold standard regulation that Mark Menzies tries to claim exists?

Board and Bodging

After the shock announcement to the Australian Securities Exchange by Cuadrilla’s parent AJ Lucas that a study they commissioned “estimated a still very large but significantly reduced GIIP resource compared to that estimated by Cuadrilla“, Cuadrilla have now announced a shake up of their management team.

The New Board of Directors, with immediate effect, is shown below:


Kenneth Williams Syd James David Brent
Kenneth Williams
Operations Director
Sid James
PR Director
David Brent
Kenneth's lengthy experience in carrying on regardless makes him uniquely suitable for this high pressure role. Ooh er Matron!As the star of Carry On Cowboy, Sid brings a wealth of relevant experience to looking after the rigs, frack towers and other erections.David's reputation for sincerity made him the obvious choice for controlling community engagement.
Jimmy Carr KFrank Spencer Baldrick
Finance Director
Jimmy Carr
Technical Director
Frank Spencer
Strategy Director
Jimmy's experience of off-shore tax arrangements will be invaluable should the company ever find a way to extract gas in the UK profitablyAll technical matters will now be in the more than capable hands of Frank Spencer. "Mmmm — nice!"We desperately need a very cunning plan. Baldrick's track record for innovative, blue sky thinking made him the right man for the job.
Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf
Corporate Affairs Director
Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf
Muhammad has been looking for a new Oil & Gas related post for some time. His media handling skills will strengthen our communications capability.

Should you have any questions about the above appointments please contact Cuadrilla’s information line, where you can speak to the nice boys and girls at PR company Lexington Communications.

Facilitation takes some strange forms

It is inarguable that Lancashire Constabulary are going above and beyond the call of duty in facilitating Cuadrilla’s operations, but some of the things we hear are quite frankly bizarre.

This story was sent to us by a motorcyclist who had some unexpected (by him at least) interaction with the boys in blue this week.

“Earlier today (21/04/2017), I was ‘trapped’ / ‘coralled’ (on my Honda Crosstourer bike) by a ‘fleet’ of police cars.

I was travelling along Fleetwood Rd, towards the M55, with 2 motorway police cars a little further ahead.

One pulled into a private road on the left (to get behind me), the other carried on to the roundabout (Wesham Cir it’s called).
When I got to the roundabout he blocked the entrance, and I was sat directly in front of him for about 5 minutes – waiting.
(He was holding me (and all other traffic) up, I assume so that he could ensure that more backup got there).

He then pulled onto the roundabout and through, off onto Fleetwood Rd (so they had the road behind me ‘blocked’ and the only other exit road ‘blocked’). This ensured that if I was avoiding them, my only route was the motorway; I took the M55 slip-road.

I noticed a police car join about a 1/4 mile behind me, steam up the outside lane, then pull in behind me (reading my plate).
At this point, I noticed 2 other police cars coming up behind him.

He over-took me, pulled in front of me and displayed a message saying “FOLLOW ME”, the other police cars sat close behind.
He pulled over onto the hard-shoulder (and I followed, with the trailing police cars pulling in behind me).
They all got out of their cars, and the lead Police officer came to me.

Long & short of it: he told me that someone on a BMW GS motorcycle (resembling my bike) had been ‘tailing’ Cuadrilla lorry drivers, and they were just checking that it wasn’t me.

I told the officer that I supported what you guys are doing, but, they could see that my bike was not a BMW GS.
(How they think that it is illegal to ‘tail’ lorry drivers anyway – I have no idea).

What they did with me was complete over-kill – at one point, they had me stopped within 5 feet of a police car at the roundabout! Why didn’t he just get out of his car and walk up to me?

Why did they intentionally try to get me onto a motorway, where I can do 130 mph to avoid them?

How many people did they inconvenience stopping all traffic?

It was like some kind of ‘SWAT’ operation!

The officer himself was courteous / polite, but, they had no reason whatsoever for this stop. (They knew my bike type – they had me stopped in front of them for 5 minutes).

This is obviously official procedure; it was too ‘organised’, and what annoys me most is that I get a feeling that it was either:

a) a ‘practice’ session or

b) an attempt to get a threatening ‘warning’ to the BMW GS owner,
and this, regardless of the inconvenience caused to unrelated people.

I fully support what you guys are doing, and, this kind of treatment makes me think: ‘should I be doing more than just ‘supporting’?’.

I’d like to know how much Cuadrilla are paying the police to cover the cost of this tax-paid police ‘operation’, and I will be writing to the Chief Constable to ask that question.”

We will update here with any response that is received.



So Matt Lambert – the head of Cuadrilla’s PR army gave an interview at that nice Mr Haythornthwaite’s festival of UKIP on Lytham Green this week – funny that we have been told that the covenants on the green prohibit its use for business purposes, but heck, what’s a regulation or two when it comes to unlocking shareholder value eh?

He stated ” probably as early as the beginning of next year we’ll be heating homes in Lancashire with Lancashire Gas“. Even the interviewer found this one hard to swallow and repeated the claim incredulously. But hey, there’s nothing like a optimist is there?

He then went on to claim that “the studies have ranged between, you know, tens of thousands of jobs and even up to about a hundred thousand in this area.”

Well Matt, as the highest estimate I’ve seen for job forecasts in the entire UK (including the entire supply chain) and not just “this area” was the IoD’s very suspect 74,000 job scenario. I wonder which report supports your interesting claim of 100,000 jobs in this area.

I have asked the Cuadrilla Information Line to confirm which study Matt was referring to and will update here when they respond.

You can hear the whole interview here http://podcast.ukfast.net/fracking-could-heat-lancashire-homes-by-2018.mp3

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

We’re not Backing Fracking

Not Backing Fracking
... but we love their web site

Drill or Drop

Drill or Drop
Drill or Drop is a "must read" resource for those wanting to keep up to date on the issues.

Fracking here’s a bad idea!

Who's fault?

"What you have to be able to do when you decide you want to hydraulic fracture is make sure there are no faults in the area. That's really very very important"

Professor Mike Stephenson - Director of Science and Technology - British Geological Survey

Fracking the UK

Fracking The UK

Fracking the UK Volumes I and II now available free from this site

"Untrustworthy, unbalanced and potentially brain washing." - Amazon Review
Yes the industry hated the first volume that much :-)

Both volumes now available as free downloads from this site Click here to download

Fracking in the Media

Campaign Groups

Frack Free Lancashire
Frack Free Lancashire

Preston New Road Action Group
Preston New Road Action Group


Defend Lytham
Defend Lytham

RAFF Group

REAF Group
Ribble Estuary Against Fracking

Frack Free Fylde

Fracking Free Ireland
Fracking Free Ireland

Fracking Digest
Fracking Digest - a summary of the week's news

Frack Free Balcombe
Frack Free Balcombe Residents Association

Frack Free Sussex
Frack Free Sussex

Frack Free York
Frack Free York

Halsall Against Fracking
Halsall Against Fracking

If you would like your group to be added please contact us

Other Groups