Is a Mega Prison at Wethersfield Really the Answer?

Is building a mega prison at Wethersfield Air Base the solution to the UK's prison crisis, or a costly misstep? This episode of the Fields Association On Air explores this pressing issue with Andrew Hull from the Wethersfield Air Base Scrutiny Committee. We dissect the alarming state of the UK's current prison system, from escalating violence to deteriorating mental health conditions, and question whether replicating systems from countries like the Netherlands—which have successfully reduced their prison populations—could be a more effective approach.

We also scrutinise the significant logistical and infrastructural hurdles presented by the proposed mega prison at Wethersfield. Remote location, poor road access, and existing staff retention issues raise red flags about the feasibility and wisdom of this project. Are we prioritising public sentiment for punishment over practical rehabilitation, and at what cost? We discuss the potential implications for government spending and public opinion if resources are misallocated to such an ambitious yet problematic endeavor.

Finally, we delve into the environmental ramifications of constructing a prison on a potentially contaminated site. With Rachel Reeves, the new chancellor, enforcing strict budgets, the massive clean-up costs needed to ensure safe drinking water for millions are a serious concern. Andrew Hull highlights the threats posed by harmful chemicals like PFAS, emphasising the need for sustainable planning. Join us as we challenge the proposed scale and context of this project, stressing the importance of practical, evidence-based decisions that truly benefit society.

Chapters

• 0:06 Debate on Mega Prisons in UK
• 11:30 Challenges of Proposed Prison Complex
• 21:13 Environmental Concerns at Wethersfield Airbase
• 29:56 Opposition to Mega Prison Construction
• 41:27 Podcast Thank You and Farewell

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:06

Hello and welcome to the Fields Association On Air. We are a group of residents who are passionate about tackling all aspects of local and national government decisions that affect local communities. In each episode, various members of the Fields Association will be exploring a range of subject matters. Fields Association will be exploring a range of subject matters, discussing all the angles of each issue and interviewing those who can add an expert or helpful point of view. So grab yourself a tea or coffee and listen in as we look to navigate through these current challenges. So, okay, welcome back to the Fields Association podcast.

Speaker 1: 0:44

It's been a while and, as we're all aware, the asylum centre's in full swing at the Wethersfield Air Base and we know there might be some movement on that sometime soon, either with the ending of the STO in a couple of years or potentially with Labour making some decisions around that scenario in the near future. But of course, with talk of closure comes what would happen to the weathersfield air base going forward, and what's always been in the background has been potential talk of having a mega prison up on the base there. So today I'm speaking with andrew andrew hull of the weathersfield air base scrutinyiny Committee and looking at potentially coming back to the question of prisons and, in general, whether it's a good idea and how it works. So hi, andrew, and give me your thoughts on the prison system in general.

Speaker 2: 1:39

Hi Tony. Well, if the press is all over the prison system, isn't it so? Obviously the prison system is a mess and has been a ticking time bomb now for a number of years. I've been rereading a lot of articles and academic papers recently again, and the experts are fairly unanimous. You know the prisons today are more dangerous than they've ever been. Mental health problems are worse, violence is worse, assaults in general are up 20%, self-harm is up by 20%. But the question is is building a supersized sort of American-style mega prison? The answer Almost certainly not. Appears to be the answer to that question. Let's give you some sort of.

Speaker 2: 2:32

Let's put the UK in some sort of international context. I was reading another paper by a professor of criminology, professor Francis Pakes, and he stated that a lot of countries, the prison um rates are dropping in many countries, but the uk is staying stubbornly high. He actually studied in in holland. The the prison rate um has dropped by 44 percent in the space of 10 years, from 2005 to 15. He was there studying it because basically what they realised is that these shorter-term prison sentences actually cause more harm than good. They create far more trouble, far more problems. So they've found a different way of analysing the root cause of all these problems, and everyone from the Prison Reform Trust, the Probation Service, would all agree that the principle of trying to stop reoffending by trying to have better mental health provisions, trying to have some more sort of alcohol abuse sort of help, have more help and rehabilitation, because the basic problem is a lot of people are coming out of prison worse than when they went in. So we have to ask ourselves is it working as a tool for rehabilitation? And the answer is quite clearly not. Um, I know that sort of flies in the face. When I before I got involved with prisons, I was of the opinion, I think, like a lot of people in the uk would be like yep, just bang them in a prison and that's the punishment. But actually I'm starting to realise now that these experts are experts for a reason and I think we should start listening to them. I think the government should start listening to them and it appears that they have. The announcement of James Timpson In all circles of prison reform is quite inspired and it does give us a lot of faith.

Speaker 2: 4:28

Um, I'm just going to find a quote that that professor stated about the? Um, the reason as to why prison closing isn't actually a bad thing. Um. So what they refer to?

Speaker 2: 4:41

Um the trend of the uk for building more prisons. They refer to this as penal populism, basically politicians implementing harsh policies that they think the public will like, rather than following the evidence that harsh sentences solve little and perpetuate social problems. Now I know that might not sound quite right to a lot of people. You do think they should punish people. Not sound quite right to a lot of people. You do think they should punish people.

Speaker 2: 5:07

But actually, if it's not working and it hasn't worked for a number of years or decades we need to have some sort of fundamental change. Because personally I'm quite fed up with handing over taxpayers' money our money and watching expert advice get ignored whilst a politician follows an opinion poll rather than sort of expert advice get ignored, whilst a politician follows an opinion poll rather than sort of expert advice. So to go back to the, the mega-sized prison idea, this goes back again to people like dominic raab, whose opinion was just lock people up, we get a bigger prisons and we just lock more people up. Um, the prison population is meant to this forecast to hit 100,000. It's around about 85, I think, thousand now. If this projection keeps going. Where are we going to stop? How many mega prisons are we going to have dotted around the country? The problem still persists. You know, there are still going to be sort of fundamental problems so, but you're saying the Netherlands has reduced their prison population.

Speaker 1: 6:07

Is that what you said?

Speaker 2: 6:07

yeah, they're actually knocking prisons down. Yeah, 44, they've, they've not, they've, they've. Uh, they've done a huge amount. Um, between 2005 and 2015, the dutch prison population was reduced by 44 and how?

Speaker 1: 6:23

how's that happening? Are they doing long sentences, short sentences? Are they letting people do different things? Community service or something?

Speaker 2: 6:29

there is a mixture of that, yeah. So they're um, the they're doing like specifically tailored mental health issues, things like that. You can see it in the press now, isn't it? You have some of these offenders are being released recently, yeah, and a lot of them would say I'll probably back because I've got nowhere to sleep and I've got all these problems, I'll be back, and some are probably back within a week. You see this, this is the problem, isn't it? They, the some of these people that go to prison, repeat offenders, have some sort of fundamental problems that could be resolved, you know, with the right sort of, uh, um, rehabilitation, the right measures, stepping in to try. And you know someone, if someone's homeless and got a, you know, a drug problem, it's probably a one-way ticket to prison, isn't it? But if somehow that can be intercepted, you know, and the problem's sort of fixed or at least sort of solved, and it's that's not just sort of fluffy, sort of sort of isn't it lovely idea. This is happening in holland. This is, this is proven.

Speaker 1: 7:31

Yeah, this is a professor of criminology saying this is working, this is happening okay, but whether we think this is a just a vote winner or not as such, if the reality is that, um, we haven't got enough prison places at the moment, if I'm sitting government um the options, obviously I can look at the holland sort of as a roadmap that might take a while, um, to implement and that might be a complete sea change in how we view prisons and incarceration. Um, but actually another option is just to build something really big, really quick, or, you know, retrospect as quickly as is possible to build, to actually just solve a little bit of a short-term problem. And whilst I'm addressing the long term, so why is? Why is a mega prison not a good idea then?

Speaker 2: 8:19

just in general. Yeah, I mean in general. They have some fundamental problems with the mega prison is the ability to get the right staff through the door in the right place. And the MOJ's own criteria states, or their own sort of methodology behind it, states that the mega prisons are most likely to succeed on the edge of a large urban fringe, on a large town or larger city. That's their own sort of very limited evidence base to that. But because it's quite simple, they need to have a workforce.

Speaker 2: 8:55

Five Wells is one of these mega prisons. It's recently been completed up in Wellingborough. It's been built now for two or three years at the cost of like 300 million and it's now regarded as one of the worst performing prisons in the country and it's brand spanking new and shiny. Because they can't retain the staff, they can't get the right staff in, they can't get the number of staff they need through the doors to actually manage the number of staff that they have. So a lot of the training centres and the workshops that are there with the view of trying to rehabilitate offenders aren't being used because they just can't get the staff. Because it's the scale of these prisons which is the problem. If they were to build smaller prisons which require sort of less staff, but spread them geographically around the country where the need is greatest. A you're going to have a much easier problem getting staff.

Speaker 2: 9:50

But the most important factor, another very important factor in making sure that a prison succeeds is access for families to visit. So if you're going to build mega prisons in the middle of nowhere, warehouses of people in very difficult, remote places where public transport is non-existent, that's a massive, massive problem in family access and which is well, well known to be a huge driving force in re-offending mental health issues deteriorate rapidly. They feel they have no family support, no one visiting and you're in prison. It's, it's. All the ingredients are wrong. And if you can't get the staff through the gate to these, why? Mega prisons are a nightmare? I mean, if they were so popular, if they were so great, why is every local planning authority that's had these proposed objected to them? I can't think of one local authority which hasn't objected to having these mega prisons put within their district. They don't bring economic benefit. They don't bring you know. They're just problems.

Speaker 1: 10:52

One of the things you just said there which really chimes with me is this was brought up about prisoners' mental health and rehabilitation and non-offending rates and in respect of families being able to visit for the well-being of the prisoner. And possibly, you know, in the past I've been guilty myself of thinking well, it's not a holiday camp, you know you're in there as a punishment and that sort of thing. But it was interesting when this very point came up recently on the news, on the national news. Those were exactly the comments that came in's not a holiday camp. You know, what about the people they've done wrong to? They should suffer this sort of thing.

Speaker 1: 11:30

But actually what you're saying is the evidence shows that actually if we do rehabilitate, it means that these people don't go back into prison. They've got more chance of staying out, um, and sort of sort of taking a different course in the future. So actually that is quite an important element, even if the general public might think, well, you shouldn't be allowed that, um, that experience of having, you know, support around you. You should, should be, should be taking some punishment. So that's quite interesting, which kind of brings us a bit to, um, more locally, sort of weathersfield, obviously in the airbase where potentially um might be looking at some sort of prison. Uh, I think the government have come out and said it's still being looked at and it's potential and this sort of thing, and of course we know they've got a 10-year prison plan, um, so could that be one of the um issues or challenges around using weathersfield as a potential prison destination?

Speaker 2: 12:30

So the site specific problems of Wethersfield are well known to us as the local communities, isn't it? So we know it's a nightmare to get to. It's one of the most remote places in relation to a strategic highway, strategic road. The nearest one is eight or nine miles away in Braintree, um, and the roads to it are narrow. Two lorries can't pass without slowing down for almost the entire duration of it. Sometimes it's pinch points, um, sharp best bends, blind corners, um. So remedy that. You'd have to probably rip out hedgerows that have been there for god knows how long and widen the road for nine miles, about four meters wide, and knock down some listed buildings on the way and probably put a bypass around Wethersfield, um. I mean, we know as local people how frequent there's a burst water main on the b1053, which is the only real road coming into Wethersfield, and as soon as that happens there is absolute chaos because there's one basic road in towards Wethersfield. Everyone is re-diverted down tiny little back lanes about eight foot nine foot wide. And so we know that if you're going to build something which is going to be the largest prison complex in Europe, you know it's going to house over 3,000 people and plus 15 it's almost 5,000 people are going to be in there at any one point, including staff. If one thing happens on the road, like it floods or there's a tree down, which happens frequently, there will be chaos. How, how do you get the food? How do you get the staffing? That could soon cause massive issues simply on the road alone, let alone the 10 years' worth of construction where there will probably inevitably be a fatality of the back of a massive increase in HGVs coming down a road where the entire length of time they're going to have to have one wheel over the white line because you just simply don't fit. But to go on to the staffing issue, so we have high point, which is about 45 minutes away up in haverhill, which is the next big town due north, basically from weathersfield. There's nothing really in between, uh, weathersfield and Haverhill and Haverhill's High Point's just had its prison capacity upgraded from 1,300 to 2,000. But the prison inspector noted that staff retention there is a major problem getting the right staff. Family access is a huge issue. We've even had High Point advertising for jobs to work at the prison in Wethersfield. So they're leafleting out in Wethersfield People go and work, drive 45 minutes to get to High Point, and further south we have Chelmsford Prison, which is a smaller prison near a court, but that still suffers the same issues. It's got problems.

Speaker 2: 15:16

So what do you think would happen if you then go and put two of the largest prisons in Europe in between the two of these already struggling prisons in a much more remote area with no real workforce in the vicinity? You're either going to suck the existing workforce out of these two struggling prisons already. You're basically going to end up with a series of very poor functioning prisons, series of very poor functioning prisons, and you you couldn't possibly have found a more of a. Well, it's probably one of the worst places you could put one. In relation to how it is sited next to existing prisons and the available workforce. Braintree is it struggles with. It has a very high employment rate. There is no real shortage of um. There's not a lot of people looking for work in Braintree. The labour force to work at this prisons, if it goes ahead, would have to come from a huge radius to the point where. Why would they bother? So I imagine they would probably struggle hugely to get the right staff and the right number of staff in the door to actually make Wethersfield work and all these problems have been said repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly.

Speaker 2: 16:31

Will they listen? Will the government listen? We hope so. With the new introduction, you know, with James Timpson it seems to hopefully some logic will come in. I mean, this could be a billion pounds to spend on this prison. I mean, with the, with the time of inflation, the two prisons it could cost hundreds and hundreds of millions. And Wethersfield, as we know, has already been a black hole for government finances. We were told the government before, when it comes to the asylum centre, that this five million pound projection for, you know, getting the asylum camp ready, it's just pure fantasy. And we warn them of all the problems with the, you know the, the sort of the infrastructure basically lacking, the state, the buildings, and the last bill, I think, was probably near 80, 90 million.

Speaker 2: 17:13

So it's not, it's not as if we don't want things to work as the communities. I mean, I'm personally fed up with just seeing opinion getting ignored and hundreds of millions of pounds getting wasted. I mean we wonder why the country's in chaos? Is because expert opinion isn't being listened to? And I sort of like to make the point. By expert opinion I also mean us, like the local community. I believe we are experts of where we live. You know, we know the problems with the roads. We know that there's. You know, we know what the issues are and we should be listened to as part of the solution to finding the right use for that base. I think they shouldn't just be sort of bulldozed through. We have, you know, it's an important factor that we are listened to.

Speaker 1: 18:02

I think all those are excellent points. I think just as well on the rural side of things. I think one of the things when it comes to the prisons is not just we've got a big space here, let's pop a prison up here, but around the security elements. I think what we've found with the asylum centre is just how isolated we feel. You know, if there's an issue and you need some sort of service support I'm talking police, ambulance, whatever it might be and we know that there's a lot of that going on almost on a daily basis um, it takes a while, should we say now, if you've got, if you're um transporting prisoners, uh, for example, whether it's to court or whatever it might be, straight away.

Speaker 1: 18:47

Two things spring to mind. One is 100% the security side of things, about, like you say, the roads um, whether people I mean does this still happen where people are kind of broken out of these things, or you know their mates kind of ambush, I don't know if that happens anymore, but I mean there's that sort of side of things to take into account. But also, on top of that, um, you've got, uh, exactly like you say that, the road closures. I mean, I can think of one at the moment. It's been closed about six weeks and they'll turn to sit down. You know a tiny little road, single lane, six foot high banks and a windmill type thing, and you think, okay, that's going to be potentially slightly challenged, isn't it? But what about the actual site itself, um, andrew, because, uh, I mean, obviously we keep hearing things about, um, ground surveys and contamination. Talk to me about that sort of side. Is that, is that an actual issue, or is that something that's just been?

Speaker 2: 19:37

created. This is um potentially a huge issue and a very, very expensive issue. The contamination on US military airfields around the world is well documented, specifically in the US. I think over 700 US bases have been pretty much condemned within the US and of course, wethersfield was a Cold War very large American military base which had decades worth of training on it. So we have had our own expert from Puro Happo, one of the most respected guys in the country when it comes to ground conditions and contamination. He's a geo-environmental scientist and it states very, very clearly that the whole site could have widespread and gross concentrations of various hazards, from class one hazards radioactive, down to hydrocarbons, to PFAS forever chemicals. And I've also had some of the when I've interviewed people that used to be health and safety officers up there and they told me the site is a disaster zone. They said it was a dumping ground for other military bases and the whole place has huge burial sites. It is a disaster zone. Our expert says just to do the ground surveys alone, just to even assess the risk, could take two to three years if done properly. That's before they even bring a digger up there to actually find out what's going on.

Speaker 2: 21:13

Now Rachel Reeves, our new chancellor, is very, very keen to have very, very strict budgets, by the sound of it, and wants to know every single penny that's going to be spent. The clean-up costs for Wethersfield could run into the millions, the many millions to potentially clean that up, but they're even doing so. There's still a brisk to our water course, and don't forget the river Pant that runs through here. The Blackwater is one of the most important rivers in the county. It supplies our reservoirs with drinking water through the Elyews transfer system rivers in the county. It supplies our reservoirs with drinking water through the elu's transfer system and it's on the floodplain, for it's on the, it's on the watershed to it. So the cost of potentially cleaning withershield would be more than actually if the government just compulsory purchased a site in the right place, next to a geocarriageway, next to a dual carriageway, next to a town. You know the potential costs could be unlimited. You know it could make it a very, very expensive prison, in a position where actually it's unlikely to work because you can't get the workforce and you can't get people to visit. So it's like it's a multifaceted it's.

Speaker 2: 22:19

The only thing going for Wethersfield is the sight that it's on flat ground. That's, I think, the only thing that's got going for it. But that flat ground also happens to be in one of the highest points of the whole valley. You know it sticks out for miles and miles. So it's what sits at dark sky now a bit of 150 acres of four-storey concrete buildings fully lit up. You know, all year round, concrete buildings fully lit up. Uh, you know all year round. So it's um, yeah, that I think the flat ground was the only, uh, basic site criteria. The weather's field fixed, actually fitted, so, um, so.

Speaker 1: 22:52

So, as a local, am I worried that the site is contaminated now and I should flee, or is it a question of leave it alone? It's okay, but if if we start bulldozing it and building, then it becomes a bigger issue, not just for locals but for, obviously, the river and the water scenario.

Speaker 2: 23:15

The airfield does have some serious potential issues. Us military airfields are notorious worldwide for leaving a legacy of huge contamination. I think over 700 sites in the US alone have been condemned and a super fund has been created to try and clean them up, which is meant to run into the many, many billions. One of the major factors is the use of firefighting foam there, the PFAS, the forever chemicals which is hot and oppressed now, the cancer-causing things which do not go away and is in our watercourses. In us Interviewing some of the health and safety officers that used to work up there and ex-firefighters up there, one described the place as a disaster zone, a burial ground for other US military sites. He tried repeatedly to get some of these burial sites investigated but was told to stop asking questions. The use of firefighting foam is up there. It's been pretty prolific, by the sound of it. There isn't many of a square inch which hasn't had some form of training upon it and at the moment a lot of this we think is sat there, sort of like dormantly seeped through the topsoil, sat on this huge, thick slab of clay which the airfield sits on. We have done our own PFAS testing on some of the watercourses coming off one pond in particular coming off one of the main discharges as an extremely high pfas um recording higher than that, was found at duxford airfield where that aquifer got taken offline because it was deemed to be too um poisonous for the water supply. Bear in mind the uk has some of the most slack and lax water guidelines in the world. I mean, our level of what's deemed acceptable is considerably lower than in the US and mainland Europe. So that is a worry in itself. Our tap water is not great, not great um. So to answer your question, at the moment, obviously our expert says the least that ground is disturbed the better. Basically, the risk is if you bring in and you're moving hundreds of thousands of tons of soil and you've got, you know, separate soil particles which are basically just full of hydrocarbons or pfas or any other sort of chemical that class.

Speaker 2: 25:41

One hazard that's been identified that could quite easily, on heavy downpours, run away and leach into the river pant, which sits probably a mile away and there's several ditches run directly to it from the base, and the pant is one of the major watercourses in Essex which supplies all of our drinking water, supplying water to the reservoirs via the EDU's transfer system. It's a fundamental water course for the drinking water of, I think, about 3 million people. It is very, very important that everything is done to make sure that that river, for its duration, for its length, is as clean as it can be, because you only have to look in the press, you know full well that drinking water at the moment, clean drinking water, is very, very it's rare. I mean, we need to really protect it. Our water courses are getting worse by the year and we need to do what we can so avoiding huge 800-acre sites which are more than likely have a widespread and gross concentration of various contaminants. It seemed pretty obvious that we shouldn't be even risking what could be unleashed if managed improperly. So, yeah, so at the moment it could be deemed safe.

Speaker 2: 27:00

It is still, I mean, for the people up there. They're still having to do for the asylum centres. They're finally someone, another person listening to our expert advice and they're doing testing up there for various things. It's possible that the water pipes themselves they could be leached. Now, if you're in a brownfield site or like a petrol station, you're building a development there, you'd have to put specially sheathed water mains in. Um, yeah, because these things can eat away at the plastic on that and get into the water pipes. This is this is a building regulation policy. Now wethersfield wouldn't have had that. Those pipes have been creaking around for 70 years. So it's it's quite possible that you know so. The cost involved with building the wethersfield, with all those mitigation costs and that sort of potential contamination, will add a considerable amount on to what is already a massively large budget in building these prisons.

Speaker 1: 27:51

So it's and and timescale, and timescale from what you said, because even the proper ground uh control yeah, whatever it.

Speaker 2: 28:01

We've had our expert go through all of the information we've received from Freedom of Information requests as to what surveys have already been undertaken by the Ministry of Justice, ministry of Defence and whatnot, and the conclusion is very clear they're inadequate, they're not good enough. One example is we've got a ministry of defense official restricting access to moj consultants trying to ascertain the ground conditions and, as our expert, that's a big no-no. You can't do your job ascertaining what the ground conditions like that when you've got a ministry of defense official telling them they can't photograph that, they can't look over there and they can't test that. That is fundamentally't look over there and they can't test that. That is fundamentally wrong and this is something that we'd be prepared to go to court over if we don't get heard, because this is our communities at stake, it's the health of our state and, to be honest, it was morally wrong as well. So okay.

Speaker 1: 29:00

So again, this kind of brings us full circle really, right back to the point you're making right up front was with whoever's in charge of this um decision, whoever is looking at this scenario and looking at weathersfield um airbase at the moment and looking at future uses and whatever it's really about collating all the information before even making the first step, let alone a decision on this, which, in fairness, I think, uh, well, certainly I, I feel, and I don't think I'm alone in this, but I think the local community probably feels wasn't the case when someone just thought, well, let's put an asylum center up there. And, as we know, it must have been hugely embarrassed. Uh, just on one element I mean a select per many one from you know 24 but even just the element of. We thought it would be 5 million and they admitted to 49. We probably suspect it's a lot more than that um, but that's just one element.

Speaker 1: 29:56

And so again it comes back to listen to the experts. Almost measure it twice, cut it once and don't go seeking opinion polls and bits and bobs. It's like look at the whole scenario before making a decision. It's kind of what I'm summarized from the whole whole conversation so far, and the contamination, obviously being a massive potential element within that, yeah, yeah, listen, listen to the experts.

Speaker 2: 30:20

This is listen to the evidence. Come and visit those who make decisions. Come and listen. It means anyone will just follow a hgv from brain trended weathersfield. Just follow a, an articulated lorry. All it needs is that journey and then anyone with any sense would have thought this is a terrible idea. Absolutely. Stand up on that plateau and look where it sits, with an open countryside we can see for miles in all directions with nothing, no town or conurbation really nearby at all, and then you ask yourself, where are you going to get a thousand to fifteen hundred staff from that are going to be able to commute in in a sustainable manner on public transport, which doesn't exist? I mean, every single step of the way. A five minute chat and a quick two hours touring around the area would give anyone.

Speaker 1: 31:05

Anyone would come to conclusion that this could be a billion pounds very badly spent but I think what's crucial is because I think when people listen to our podcast or look at the website, whatever, a lot of the time it's these are nimbies and you know, it's about not in my backyard type thing, um, and I think that accusation could be thrown quite easily. Uh, but from what you've said, it's not about that. It's about looking at the evidence, it's about looking at the contamination, it's about looking at the moj's own policies, making an informed decision rather than from the hip, really. But here's one of the um, the challenges.

Speaker 1: 31:40

We there's no doubt the asylum center has kind of uh, fractured, should we say, to put it nicely. The community and there'll probably be a legacy from that um, not dissimilar to sort of brexit, kind of sit on one side of the fence or the other and there's a few people in between. So that's that's been interesting and slightly toxic in its own way, um. But part of the challenge has been well, okay, local community, what would you do? You keep saying, well, we don't want asylum centers and we don't want prisons, and there's all these reasons, and they all seem to be extremely valid. Um, but what do you want to do with it then? Because I'm not sure if we've even got the opportunity to put that forward or to get hold of that at this stage.

Speaker 2: 32:21

I think a lot of it comes down to scale, doesn't it? I mean, a lot of the asylum centre initially came up there abounding a figure of having 1,700 people up there and, proportionally for scale, that was going to cause issues. And we said that's going to cause massive problems and, lo and behold, huge issues arose. They couldn't manage it and now the numbers seem to be around 500, 550, because basically, even under I think even the Home Office's own admission, anything over that is unmanageable. Yeah, who would have guessed? This is fairly obvious. But yeah, I mean, it's easy to level the term NIMBYism, but personally I'm fed up with taxpayers' money. I mean, we're all going to get huge tax bills and rises and I'm starting to absolutely. The more I've been dealing and looking into government departments, the more I resent handing over any money, because actually I'd get more satisfaction if I went and went to the bank, pulled some cash out and just burnt it because I think it's actually going to be put to better use. Um, so, to go back, it's about context and scale and what is already here. So when we look at weathersfield, where are we? In? One of the most remote parts of the country in relation to Street Road. We are sat bang in the middle of Essex County Council's climate focus area, which is one of the most ambitious targets to hit net zero before any other county in the country. We have one of the most important rivers, as we just talked about, flying right through this whole landscape very close to the airbase, which is a major watershed into the pant and the black water catchment in general. Next to the airbase we have some nationally significant nature recovery projects. We have the work at Spain's Hall, which is one of the largest agroforestry schemes in the country. Immediately right next to the airbase we have one of the largest biodiversity net gain projects from Wildfell and within the landscape around us we have one of the most successful and biggest farm clusters in the country and the heartland runs pretty much from brain tree right through to beyond finching field where we're trying to deliver environmental policies at pace and at scale, and it's funded by people like the environment agency because they are aware of the significance of this valley, this whole area, because of the water course it runs through and what is already happening here. We we're already doing a huge amount. So it's all about scale and purpose and context. So what we should be doing is amplifying that. We should be making that better, greater. We should be doing things that are more connected. We're doing all this great work.

Speaker 2: 35:14

The last thing that needs to be done is one of the largest building projects in the southeast of England slap bang in the middle of it, because we're just going to negate all that hard work we've been doing for several years in one fell swoop. You know, goodbye clean water, uh, you know, goodbye dark skies and wildlife and things like this. It's, um and hello, unknown costs and mitigation trying to stop all the problems which are buried under the ground at Wethersfield. So by incorporating the airbase, at least the airfield what we've got to be quite clear here is that the prisons are going to be put on grassland and runway, not using a footprint of an existing building. So that's quite important to make that very clear, that distinction.

Speaker 2: 35:52

This is a very large brownfield site with buildings on it due for development. I'm talking specifically about the grassland and the runway that is likely to be highly contaminated. That best purpose for that is to incorporate that into a larger nature recovery project, joining up with the several thousand acres around it, and for almost no cost at we could create a landscape of national significance, doing a huge amount for our environment, which all sounds a bit fluffy, but this stuff is important. Actually, this is very important. It has huge cost implications of what we're saving. We're saving a huge amount of cleanup in our river. We're actually ticking a huge amount of legal obligations our government has to hit. I mean, but for a fraction of the cost a fraction of the cost you're talking literally a few million would get a hugely significant landscape, something of real national importance.

Speaker 2: 36:51

That, to me, is where taxpayers' money would be far better funded, and that's what it all boils down to. To me, it's how well is our taxpayers money being spent? Uh, listen to the evidence, listen to the look at the context things are in and make the best decision for the best site. Um, not just do a knee-jerk reaction, listening to opinion polls and just trying to put you know. Try and do quick fixes that make good sound bites on national press. It's poorly thought out and it's ill conceived. We need some slightly more longer term strategy.

Speaker 1: 37:27

So that's a definite message to the current government, then, is don't don't rush into things, don't make the potentially the same sort of mistakes that the previous government did, and look at the potential of what we could do for the local community, the wider community, the area, rather than the downside of potential imposition and destruction that a megaprocessor might bring.

Speaker 2: 37:55

Okay, with James Timpson being now the prisons minister. That is a breath of fresh air. Everyone in the prison reform world when he was a chairman of the Prison Reform Trust, which was, I mean that does give us some hope. But I think I mean what really should be done? Done with no doubt some new prisons need to be built, but they should be, like I said, smaller, manageable. You know, when these prisons go wrong they go wrong in a big, horrible way, at great expense.

Speaker 2: 38:30

I know they're probably more cost effective to build a prison per capita in the short term. So when the Treasury looks at how much that prison costs per head, they go well, that's cheap, that's good, but actually does it work? Is it effective? Is it the best tool we're going to have for the longer-term strategy of making sure people don't re-offend? And it's very, very unlikely that these mega prisons and why they are like that. It's probably worth paying a little bit extra, building smaller prisons regionally that are easy accessible for staff families in areas where they're needed, but not overwhelming an area trying to gain economies of scale which, in this instance, are flawed. Because it has to be effective, you can build a prison, I mean. Basically, I think they've gone to America for inspiration how to build American-style prisons, and you might as well go there looking for advice on gun control at the same time, because America has one of the highest incarceration rates in the Western world. Is that a model we want to be following? I don't think it is.

Speaker 1: 39:32

I think historically that's a model we have followed't it? That goes back a long way with um, the relationship with america. But okay, so we've got. Obviously we've got millions of listeners. Andrew, clearly there'll be number 10 now listening to us again, andrew and tony uh, talking some sense there, um, along with the other ministers. But again, I think it's it's worth saying there are associations, whether it's the field association, wasc, 12 parish councils have got together, which is so amazing in this role. It's. It's an. It's a very pressing subject. People want clarity and want certainty. It's impacting on on people for all sorts of reasons, and that mental well-being, how all sorts of things been going on that been fed back to us. It'd be great to have someone actually reach out and actually take the time, sit down with us and, as you said, incorporate us potentially as one of the experts making some sort of decision come and visit.

Speaker 2: 40:34

Come and visit. Okay, come and visit, we can, we can, we'll show them the, show them the area and in a very brief space of time he realised that our taxpayers money is better spent elsewhere.

Speaker 1: 40:49

Fantastic, all right. Well, that's brilliant, andrew, I mean. Appreciate your time. What I think my next step is to do is to see if I can get hold of someone that can expand a bit more on some of the exciting things that we might be able to um do with words going forward, um, and and what that might do for local national uh scenario as well.

Speaker 2: 41:07

but, um but a really great plans. We could be put on the map nationally for all the right reasons with what, what's going on, not not the wrong reasons. So we we've got big, nationally ambitious plans, which actually, yeah, I think we'll put this here on the map for the right reasons fantastic well, it's andrew, as always.

Speaker 1: 41:27

Thank you very much for your time and um opinions and expertise, and no doubt we'll catch up very soon. Thanks, tony. Thanks. Thanks for listening. We hope you enjoyed this episode and found it informative. Soon, thanks, tony. Thanks. Thanks for listening. We hope you enjoyed this episode and found it informative. Please make sure that you subscribe to our podcast so you don't miss a single episode. If you have a question that you would like to raise, or if there is a subject that you think would make an interesting episode, please email us on the link below. If you would like to support the show further, you can do so by clicking on the link below. If you would like to support the show further, you can do so by clicking on the link below as well. Until next time, goodbye.