Noble defends Hadrian’s villa from Rome’s rubbish

Note: This article is from the Guardian.


Powered by Guardian.co.ukThis article titled “Noble defends Hadrian’s villa from Rome’s rubbish” was written by Tom Kington in Rome, for The Guardian on Tuesday 1st November 2011 20.34 UTC

When he decided to build his palace in the fields outside Rome in the second century AD, the emperor Hadrian wanted to escape the sounds and the smells of the capital.

Little did he imagine that 18 centuries later the stench of the city would follow him there thanks to plans to build an emergency rubbish dump near the villa, as Rome runs out of space to bury its trash.

But now, another Roman noble has stepped in to defend Hadrian’s villa near Tivoli from the garbage trucks, which are expected in the new year. Prince Urbano Barberini, an actor, farmer and descendant of a 17th century pope, is mustering local farmers for a fightback against a scheme he claims will ruin the Unesco-listed ruins.

“This is like dumping rubbish next to the pyramids – what if tourists have to time their visits according to which way the wind is blowing?” said Barberini, who produces olive oil locally. “And should people attending the concerts held at the ruins bring masks?”

The decision to dump rubbish in an old quarry near the villa after Rome’s main tip at Malagrotta was filled to capacity was taken using emergency powers to overrule bans on developing the virgin countryside.

“There will be no going back on this, there can be no hesitation,” said Renata Polverini, the governor of the region of Lazio on Monday.

A 250-acre complex of 30 buildings including palaces, baths, a theatre, temples and libraries built in Greek and Egyptian styles, Hadrian’s villa centres around a small house sitting in the middle of a pool, accessed only by drawbridges, where the emperor could seek refuge from his court.

“You can’t bury 2,000 years of history under tonnes of rubbish,” wrote actor and campaigner Franca Valeri in a full-page appeal to Italian president Giorgio Napolitano taken out in Italian daily Corriere della Sera.

Barberini warned that a Roman era underground aquaduct which still carries water into Rome 18 miles away, is dug into the porous tufo under the site of the proposed dump and risks being polluted.

“A small tributary of a river that runs into the capital is also 30 metres from the site,” he added. “It floods regularly, and we risk rubbish floating straight back to Rome.”

A descendant of Pope Urban VIII, who commissioned works in Rome by Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Barberini owns a castle in the nearby picture postcard hamlet of San Vittorino. But he denied the campaign was a case of not-in-my-castle’s-back yard.

“My visibility is useful, but this is really about local farmers who were all told to go organic and now will have nothing. We are fighting tanks with arrows, but this will be a battle to the end.”

Local campaigners have been joined by Italian environmental group Legambiente, which has attacked the governor of the region of Lazio, which covers Rome, for opening new dumps instead of promoting recycling in Rome – with 80% of the city’s rubbish, it stated, still ending up in dumps.

The regional authority is also planning to unload tonnes of rubbish in quarries next to the small town of Riano north of Rome, where locals have blocked railway lines in protest.

“We are heading towards a garbage crisis like Naples’,” said Barberini. “Why couldn’t they use their emergency powers to push recycling? The region once promoted the area around Hadrian’s villa as a tourist destination, recommending a series of walks. Half of those pass straight through where the rubbish will be.”

This article was amended on 2 November 2011. The name in the standfirst was changed to Urbano Barberini.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

Reveal prince’s input on planning law, government urged

Note: This article is from the Guardian.


Powered by Guardian.co.ukThis article titled “Reveal Prince Charles’s input on planning law, government urged” was written by Robert Booth, for The Guardian on Monday 31st October 2011 16.56 UTC

The government is facing growing pressure to reveal how the Prince of Wales has used his power of consent over draft legislation after it emerged ministers asked him to approve planning and construction laws because they might directly affect the private £700m property empire that provides his annual income.

Documents obtained by the Guardian reveal that in 2008 Lady Andrews, a Labour communities minister, wrote to Sir Michael Peat, his private secretary, seeking Prince Charles’s consent to law changes that would “affect the interests of the Duchy of Cornwall” and were “capable of applying … [to the] Prince of Wales’ private interests”.

The draft local democracy, economic development and construction bill proposed to change laws about handling disputes and payments in building contracts and to introduce a new regional strategy for planning permissions. The duchy is a leading builder and has spent more than £18m on property development and improvements in the last two years, according to its accounts.

It also has large developments under way that require planning consent, including 500 new homes at Poundbury, Dorset.

Prince Charles relies on duchy profits to fund his lifestyle and work, and last year received £18m in profits from the estate. Charles has been granted the right to veto draft bills because they might affect his interests or those of the Duchy of Cornwall in what constitutional experts described as the equivalent of a royal “nuclear deterrent” over public policy. On Monday details emerged of five more bills to which the Prince has been asked to grant consent since 2005, bringing the total over the period to at least 17. They covered subjects such as marine navigation, retail development, company law and charities, parliamentary records show.

On Monday night Labour peer Lord Berkeley, who was ordered to seek the prince’s consent over a bill on marine navigation, formally called on the government to “publish all correspondence between the Prince of Wales and the Queen and ministers in connection with bills for which their consent is sought” and to say “whether any bill in the last five years has been altered as a result of comments from Prince Charles or the Queen, and in what way”.

Clarence House and Whitehall seemed to be divided over whether such transparency was a good idea. Clarence House declined to say how the Prince responded to the draft local democracy, economic development and construction bill. A spokesman for the Department for Communities said on Monday “no changes were requested and as such none were introduced”.

Asked if David Cameron – who last week agreed with Commonwealth states to change the rules on succession to the throne – had any plans to reform the system, the prime minister’s spokeswoman said: “I know of no plans at the moment to look into it.”

Clarence House insisted any correspondence was a “private matter” but said the convention was not about seeking the prince’s personal opinions. “Parliamentary procedure determines that the Prince of Wales in his capacity as the Duke of Cornwall may be required to give his consent to bills directly affecting the interests of the duchy,” the prince’s spokesman said. “This is not about seeking the personal views of the prince but rather it is a longstanding convention in relation to the Duchy of Cornwall, which would have applied equally to his predecessors.”

Graham Smith, director of Republic, the campaign for a directly elected head of state, said the loophole was fundamentally anti-democratic. “Charles is quite capable of doing the right thing by refusing to exploit his position for personal gain – yet he refuses to do so,” Smith said.

The government and Clarence House have repeatedly refused to disclose correspondence detailing the application of Charles’s power.

The justice, education and food and rural affairs departments are among those to invoke an exemption to freedom of information laws that allows correspondence between Charles and his aides and government to be kept secret, claiming that to do otherwise “would undermine the Prince of Wales’s privacy” and “could have a chilling effect on the way in which he or his representatives correspond with government ministers”.

In a rare exception, the Department for Communities agreed to release its letters to Prince Charles over the local democracy, economic development and construction bill, providing a unique insight into the application of the otherwise secretive protocol. Lady Andrews’s three-page consultation with Charles on draft planning and construction laws begins: “I write to formally request the consent of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales to provisions to be included in the … bill.”

It includes 12 detailed paragraphs on how the new legislation will change laws on adjudication procedures in contractual disputes with builders and laws affecting how contractors must be paid.

Andrews explained: “Granted that these proposed changes … will apply to construction contracts entered into by or on behalf of the Duchy of Cornwall, we should be very grateful to receive the consent of the Prince of Wales.”

Turning to changes to regional planning law, she spelled out proposed new regional planning strategies and warned Charles that this section of the bill “is capable of applying to the Crown and the Queen and Prince of Wales’ private interests and therefore that consent is required”.

“They were trying to tell him in 2008 that, like everybody else, he will be subject to statutory development plans,” said David Lock, a former government planning adviser. “This was an attempt to make the crown estate and duchy subject to the same planning rules as everyone else, which means they would not get any privileges over any other land owner.” A Clarence House spokeswoman confirmed the duchy enjoys some exemptions from normal planning laws but “has chosen not to exercise these rights since the change in legislation”.

“Since 2006 the duchy has been subject to planning control in the same way as any other landowner and prior to that voluntarily complied with planning laws,” the spokeswoman said.

Labour has called for “complete transparency” about the views, if any, that Charles has expressed in the process of granting consent to bills.

“Most people will be taken aback by what the Guardian has highlighted,” said Wayne David MP, Labour’s spokesman on constitutional reform. “There needs to be a mechanism so that the if the Prince of Wales is expressing a formal position he can do that an open way. We live in a democratic society so any views expressed should be disclosed and should be open to scrutiny and analysis.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

British royal news

King and Queen visit India

Bhutan newly married royals on first foreign trip

Protests in Morocco

Moroccans protest polls, violence in the capital