(For a critic who objected there were no GCNs in the last photo, here's one with GCNs on clear display. Actually there was at least one, but it was tiny and half buried in a heap of newts.)

If the future of Wicklesham Quarry SSSI, or the prospect of a 33,500 sqm industrial/ commercial development on Faringdon’s doorstep – which COULD turn out to be ANYTHING from a bioscience dog-breeding facility for medical experimentation to a data centre – plays a part in YOUR vote for Faringdon's County Councillor on 1st May, here are your choices.

These statements are concerned solely with the records of the candidates in relation to Wicklesham Quarry SSSI, Faringdon’s most important environmental site for BIO AND GEODIVERSITY.

• If you are a candidate who has  changed your mind, or if you wish to clarify or publicise your views on Wicklesham Quarry SSSI, please get in touch and I shall be happy to assist. 

(On 10th June 2024 Faringdon Town Council voted unaninimously to SUPPORT the proposed development. The submitted plans were then for a 42,286 sqm development. That vote is therefore what is referred to below. NO OBJECTIONS WERE RECORDED)

JAMES FAMAKIN – Faringdon Town Councillor –VOTED IN FAVOUR OF a 42,286 sqm development on top of Wicklesham Quarry SSSI.

KATHERINE FOXHALL – Vale District Councillor – has submitted OBJECTIONS to the Wicklesham Quarry proposal to all 3 public consultations to Oxfordshire County Council.*

CHRIS PALMER – Faringdon Town Councillor - VOTED IN FAVOUR OF a 42,286 sqm development on top of Wicklesham Quarry SSSI.

TIM PERKIN – No public record relating to Wicklesham Quarry SSSI. VIEWS NOT KNOWN.

BETHIA THOMAS – Vale District Councillor and former Faringdon Town Councillor – Her qualified objection in 1st consultation was followed by a comment that the application needed ‘further improvements’, and an unpublished ‘informal’ statement to County Council Officers in the 3rd consultation.*

Ms Thomas has not responded to my email asking her the following questions in order to try to clarify her position:

• Did you object to the proposal at the third consultation?
• Will you publicly post (or email to me) your last 'informal' submission to the consultation?
• Do you support the strategic policies of the Local Plan, including the Sub-Area Strategy for the Western Vale?
   

*The responses by District Councillors Foxhall and Thomas to consultations can be seen on the County Council website among the documents for Application MW.0151/23.

If any candidate considers their record and views have not been accurately represented, or if you have changed your mind, please drop an email to protectwicklesham@gmail.com, and I shall ensure that a further update is issued with any necessary amendments. That includes the reticent Ms Bethia Thomas.