Councils in Cambridgeshire have joined forces with local authorities to challenge the funding mechanism required for the final stages of a £600m solar farm. 

Cambridgeshire County Council, East Cambridgeshire District Council, Suffolk County Council and West Suffolk Council have all called on the government to correct an error in planning permission that could otherwise cost local taxpayers hundreds of thousands of pounds.

They have now written to the energy secretary Ed Miliband to express concern that Sunnica developers could avoid meeting the costs the burden of the UK’s largest solar farm will place on local authorities and have advised him of their challenge. 

Mr Miliband approved the scheme on July 12 along with two other major solar power projects: Mallow Pass Solar Project and Gate Burton. 

The decision came just days after the Chancellor said that he and the Transport Secretary would prioritise decisions on infrastructure projects that have been sitting unresolved for far too long.

The proposed 2,500-acre scheme consists of a solar and battery plant.  

It is set to be located across three sites: Sunnica East Site A, near Isleham; Sunnica East Site B, near Feckenham and Worlington; and Sunnica West Site A, near Chippenham and Kennett.  

Cambridgeshire County Council previously passed a motion at Full Council on the July 20 2021 stating the authority’s opposition to Sunnica’s proposals.

Following the announcement, East Cambridgeshire District Council sough independent legal advice to understand the chances of success of a Judicial Review of the decision-making process. 

The district council has worked closely with Suffolk County and West Suffolk councils, both of which also took their own independent legal advice; all three legal opinions are in accordance with each other. 

The advice received by all three councils is that there is an opportunity for the councils to challenge the funding mechanism required to undertake the final stages of work.

Cllr Anna Bailey said: “We are shocked that the Secretary of State has given the go ahead for this massive development on food production land in rural East Cambridgeshire and the council is now facing huge increased cost in dealing with this matter, which hasn’t been taken into account in the decision.

“It is extremely disappointing that after years of making the clear case that a solar farm of this magnitude is in the wrong place and winning that argument at the hearing, the Secretary of State decided to grant a development order against the wishes of the community, the four affected councils, and against the expert advice of the Examiner.

“There is currently no direct benefit to our communities from this site. It is deemed to have a significant impact on our communities, and there are also biodiversity concerns. Added to this, unlike other solar farms, residents will not benefit from cheaper energy, nor will the council receive any potential business rates income from the facility.

“This council is completely supportive of renewable energy. This has been demonstrated by our approval of renewable energy schemes on land outside of Burwell and Soham over the past few years.

“But it’s imperative such schemes are in the right place and are right for the communities in which they are located.”

Sunnica also have permission for a connection of up to 500MW at the Burwell National Grid Substation.

Chair of Cambridgeshire County Council’s Environment and Green Investment Committee, Councillor Lorna Dupre said: “We have already expressed our disappointment at the decision to grant permission for this large development, which will have a huge effect on residents and businesses as well as the local environment.

“The prospect of this huge development is of deep concern to those of us in East Cambridgeshire. Furthermore, an error within the planning approval has not accounted for the extensive technical and administrative input needed from the four local authorities affected by Sunnica’s proposals. This means that local people could not only face development all around them but could also be asked to pick up the tab for developers’ ambitions.  

“These private company’s plans cannot be carried out at public cost to local taxpayers.”