Deadline for comments on power plant plans for Great Bowden is still February 8 - despite efforts to move the date

The applicant behind controversial plans for a manure-fired power plant, GMT Biogas, has offered to extend the consultation period to accommodate a meeting with Great Bowden Parish Council.

But campaigners say such an offer is not within their power – and that the February 8 deadline for comments still stands.

Villagers met last weekend, along with Harborough District Council representatives and MP Neil O’Brien, to discuss concerns over traffic, smells and the size and proximity of the anaerobic digestion plant, which would be sited on the derelict Marigold Farm, off Welham Way.

Objectors have called the plans ‘severely flawed’, and say they contravene the Great Bowden Neighbourhood Plan, which states large buildings should not ‘adversely affect the character, infrastructure and environment of the village’.

They also believe operations will involve a ‘constant stream of lorries delivering smelly, decomposing material’ to be converted into gas on-site.

In response, GMT extended an invitation to the community to discuss concerns directly, via a previous report by the Mail.

However, campaigners accused the developer of leaving it too late, and ‘ambushing’ residents with ‘insufficient reports’, with just three weeks for them to have their say.

Taking their comments into account, GMT said it would appeal directly to the parish council and was happy to extend the consultation period, due to end today (Thursday), to allow more discussion following the meeting.

Speaking on behalf of the campaigners, resident Chris Attenborough said: “We were very surprised to hear GMT state that the consultation period would be extended. We were unaware that GMT has the power to unilaterally take the decision to extend the consultation period, so we immediately sought clarification from LCC. Unsurprisingly, we were right on this. LCC has come back and said that any public engagement by the applicant is not the same as statutory publicity consultation exercises undertaken by LCC and there would be no scope for an extension.

"This means the deadline remains February 8 for comments and objections. We feel that that statement made by GMT is therefore potentially misleading and may confuse people into thinking they have longer to object when they don’t.”

In response to leaving the offer late, GMT’s technical director Phil Greenaway explained he approached the three householders closest to the proposed site, and met them to discuss their concerns. This, he said, was the beginning of the company’s engagement with the community. He argued there was no point in meeting the parish council before the application had been validated, which took longer than normal to ensure all the relevant documents were in place.

Bur Mr Attenborough replied: “GMT’s application says the closest house is 325m away. As Mr Greenaway now tells us he has met the three closest residents to reassure them, he must now know the closest house is actually 120m away, (a fundamental inaccuracy in the application). After speaking to one of these residents, as far we are aware, none of the houses have been reassured by anything they have heard or seen as part of this approach and indeed at least one of these residents says they have not been approached.”

Mr Greenaway said: “I am surprised by the comment suggesting there are ‘insufficient reports’ when the planning officer was meticulous in ensuring that we did have all the reports in place.

“The suggestion that the parish council was ‘ambushed’ is, I believe, unfair. Previously I have left the parish council to assess the application and then asked for a meeting, if it needed one. Historically, this has been the standard procedure because there may be changes between then and now, dependent upon the planner’s requirements, and it is important to discuss the actual validated application.”

He said he had no prior knowledge of the meeting taking place last weekend.

He added: “I now know the county council was invited and therefore got the impression that GMT wasn’t welcome, and that it was probably better to suggest a meeting via a third party, which would address all the points raised. I believe that when the meeting takes place, it will help allay many of the concerns.”

Mr Attenborough said on behalf of the campaigners: "This week we were delighted to receive the support of the Harborough, Oadby & Wigston Green Party. This endorsement for our campaign shows GMT’s plans as nothing more than the blatant greenwashing they are.

“So, we now have a situation where the Conservative MP, the Lib Dem leader of the council, the local Green Party and the pparish council are against the plant, while Harborough District Council have expressed numerous concerns and almost 500 people have signed Neil O’Brien’s petition. So, it seems the one person in favour of the plant is Mr Greenaway.”