THE government was entirely inconsistent in allowing gas drilling in Surrey on the same day it barred a similar project in Cheshire, the High Court heard today.

Communities Secretary Michael Gove’s decision was branded untenable as his department had dismissed another directly comparable gas drilling case near Ellesmere Port in Cheshire due to its impact on climate change.

Housing Minister Stuart Andrew overrode Surrey County Council’s refusal for UK Oil and Gas to explore the site near Dunsfold village on Mr Gove’s behalf last June. 

This sparked a legal challenge by Protect Dunsfold and Waverley Borough Council against the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities which returned to court today.

Estelle Dehon KC, for the campaign group, said in written submissions that the department’s two decisions “were made concurrently and indeed published on the same day.

“The defendants’ case is essentially that the Secretary of State is entitled to take an entirely inconsistent position between different appeals on the impact of unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions even when they are for the same type of development and that impact is identical.

“That position is untenable.

“It is not a sensible approach to decision-making and it ultimately helps no-one involved in the planning process, be it local planning authority, objector or developer.”

The proposed site is in the Surrey Hills, designated an area of great landscape value, and sits on the border of an area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB).

The area’s MP, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt, called the move to grant planning permission “bitterly disappointing and wrong both economically and environmentally” at the time.

The government department and UK Oil and Gas are contesting the case.

James Strachan KC, for the department, said: “The fallacy at the heart of Protect Dunsfold’s case is the flawed notion that a planning judgement which involved the weighing of all the relevant considerations to a specific development in one particular location is somehow transferable or applicable to a different development in a different location.”

He said Waverley Borough Council’s argument that the minister and inspector did not consider government policy related to protecting AONBs “simply fails to get off the ground.”

Several activists, including members of Extinction Rebellion, demonstrated outside of the Royal Courts of Justice ahead of the hearing before Mrs Justice Steyn.