Penhale should belong to the nation, not to a developer.

As a National Trust member, I know that many of us were deeply saddened by the National Trust's failure to purchase Penhale Camp at Holywell in Cornwall, when it was sold by the MOD.

Instead it fell into the hands of developers who have plans to build holiday homes on this iconic peninsula, when in reality, after serving the nation's defences for over seven decades, it should have been returned to its natural wild state for everyone to enjoy.

We will not let the matter rest; discussions have revealed an appetite for an appeal to buy back Penhale for the enjoyment of everyone who appreciates the splendour of the North Cornish Coast.

This has been given added momentum by the current sad times we are experiencing, where the idea that Penhale could become a national memorial to everyone whose lives have been touched by the current tragic Covid-19 epidemic, with the area dedicated to their memory.

There are already several pledges of significant donations to an appeal to raise the money locally, but it is felt very appropriate given its adjacent holdings, that even at this late hour, our National Trust would be the most appropriate body to take the lead on this exciting project.

What does the membership feel about this?

A comment about ''buy back Penhale'' is a masterpiece:

''Ask The Duke of Cornwall for a donation, he believes that the countryside needs to be preserved apparently''.

The Duke of Cornwall through the Duchy of Cornwall does very well out of Cornwall from diverse sources, notably rental income and the profits from major land developments which have not in truth enhanced the Cornish countryside, even though we been told repeatedly that they are necessary.

A Practical Suggestion

The comment makes a point but I would go further and suggest that Penhale should become a national memorial to the tens of thousands of COVID19 victims and those soldiers killed during a WW2 German bombing raid and who are buried in the Parish at Perranzabuloe.

Few can see any merit in the development of this iconic headland as yet another development of tacky second homes.

The Duke of Cornwall's involvement would mitigate, by offsetting the loss of hundreds of acres of prime farmland at Tregurra and Nansledan.

The Duke of Cornwall's involvement as a Patron, or better still a benefactor, would go a long way towards restoring his standing in the Duchy, given so many are saddened by his pro-development agenda against the wishes of the vast majority of Cornish people

An act of penance by Cornwall Council by getting involved would also offset the anger felt from the imposition of the Langarth development, given that Cornwall Council should have bought Penhale for Cornwall in the first place, and given its environmental significance.

In a nutshell, Penhale is a development too far. The authorities should recognise this fact and act accordingly.

Stop press

In less than an hour, £11,000 has been pledged to buy back Penhale. What a fantastic start! Let’s prove what can be done if we pull together. Have you got your ears on Cornwall Council?

Separately:

Cornwall Council's consultation on the current stage of its Climate Change planning ends next Tuesday - 26th. Here's my response

cornwalldevelopersparadise.wordpress.com/2020/05/22/finger-in-the-dike-cornwall-councils-climate-change-development-planning-document/

This Scoping Report is fatally flawed in that it ignores the Council’s own policies, contradictory in that their effect is to increase GHG emissions even as the climate change plan vainly attempts to reduce them. There is a failure to quantify the effect of policies or of any projected savings that might result from them. Overall, the policies proposed are inadequate to meet the scale of the challenge.

The Council is trapped by the fossil-fuel based growth fetishism it and its predecessors have embraced since the 1980s. It is persisting in the delusion that reductions in GHG emissions and other laudable aims can only be achieved through building stuff, for example achieving biodiversity gains through building in the countryside. It ignores the possibility of achieving reductions by stopping doing stuff. Continuing with business as usual makes achieving the target of zero carbon by 2030 a hopeless task.