Disaster? There we disagree, but as you’ve pointed out before we are never going to see eye to eye on this.
Everyone loves a conspiracy theory but there has been no brown envelopes
The first application for this development was roundly opposed by the Staffordshire Wildlife Trust, with a fully appointed document detailing the extent of their objections on numerous counts.
Natural England made no case against, but essentially delegated their response to the most appropriate body 'on the ground', by saying that planners should pay "strong regard" to that body, which was and is the Staffordshire Wildlife Trust.
I even made the joke at the time that the Rugby Club and Stafford Borough Council had misread "strong" as 'scant'.
If you remember rightly, you'll remember that the application that your current scar is built on required a second application - some sort of assurance about 'light spill' might have been included, those sorts of things - of which Natural England said that planners should "regard" the input of Staffordshire Wildlife Trust.
I contacted Natural England at the time to try and make them reinstate the
exact phrase - "strong regard" - in relation to their advice to the Borough Council and have not heard from them since.
Yes, disaster.