The owner of the proposed fracking site at Balcombe has declared there is ‘little or no risk to [his] estate or the wider area' because it will be ‘carefully managed and properly regulated’. (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/20/balcombe-landlord-support-fracking-oil
Does he not realise that this government is ideologically opposed to regulations and wants to ‘cut red tape’?
Is he unaware that the government is currently making savage cuts to the budget of the Environment Agency which could lead to the loss of as many as 4,000 of its 11,000 staff?
This is in addition to a series of past cuts to staffing levels e.g. 15% reduction in Environment Agency staff in 2011. http://www.brownfieldbriefing.com/news/environment-agency-has-already-lost-15-its-staff
Where are the staff going to come from to check that regulations are being complied with under these circumstances?
We already know that fracking in Lancashire has faced minimal inspections with three government agencies (Department of Energy and Climate Change, the Environment Agency, and the Health and Safety Executive) all passing the buck because nobody has overall regulatory oversight for fracking and none of them have the resources they need.
Why should it be any different in Balcombe, or indeed anywhere else in the country?