Ministers were “not adequately briefed” on alternative options by authorities before re-approving plans to build a road tunnel under Stonehenge, lawyers for campaigners have argued in the High Court – the latest legal attempt to block the controversial plans.
Campaigners argue the proposed two-mile (3.3-kilometer) road tunnel, part of a new eight-mile (13-kilometer) dual carriageway off the A303 road, would not only destroy large swaths of archaeological sites around Stonehenge, including ancient monuments and listed buildings, but would also cost at least £2.5 billion and increase emissions.
The hearing is the latest chapter in a lengthy legal battle since then transport secretary Grant Shapps gave the plan the green light in 2020, only for a judge to overturn that decision in 2021. Former transport secretary Huw Merriman issued a second development permit order (DCO) on behalf of then transport secretary Mark Harper in July 2023. Campaigners lost their first High Court challenge to the decision in December last year, and a ruling was handed down in February.
During a three-day hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice that began on Monday, lawyers for the Stonehenge World Heritage Protection Alliance are appealing the ruling on up to eight grounds and are again seeking a judicial review of the Department for Transport’s decision.
Lawyers for the campaigners will focus on the advice given to ministers and whether the judge was right to say Merriman did not need to reconsider the material in Judge Shapps’ original decision to grant a DCO despite the planning inspector finding the project would cause “permanent and irreparable harm” to the area.
The appeal also alleges that Merriman ignored new evidence that the plans would endanger Stonehenge’s World Heritage status and acted unlawfully in his approach to international treaties.
“The minister is responsible for this decision, not his staff,” David Wolf, a lawyer for the activists, said in his opening statement.
“We argue that this decision was made after sifting through too many things,” Mr Woolf said, adding that “ministers misunderstood what we were asking for… in part because we were not informed of what we were asking for.”
Mr Woolf said this did not mean ministers had personally considered alternatives, including the tunnel extension option, but simply satisfied that the Highways Agency had looked at other options for the road and bypass. “That’s not the same as them considering the merits of the alternatives,” he said.
Mr Woolf said some of the expert evidence submitted to the consultation “would have been policy-changing”. [but] Not rated.
The hearing will continue until Wednesday.
After newsletter promotion
National Highways, the project’s sponsor, said the tunnel and road widening project would ease traffic around Stonehenge. The A303, the main road into southwest England, is normally a two-lane road, but there are frequent congestions on short, single-lane stretches of the road.
Historic England, another co-defendant in the case, described the plans as “a unique opportunity to restore this internationally significant landscape”.
UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee is due to meet in Derry later this month to decide on its June recommendation to place Stonehenge on the List of World Heritage Sites in Danger, raising the possibility that it could lose its world heritage status altogether.
Activists are calling on the new Labour government to abandon the plans, regardless of the outcome of the trial. Tom Holland, chairman of the Stonehenge Alliance and a historian, broadcaster and author, said: “It’s time to stop this ineffective, hugely damaging and incredibly expensive plan. The new government should seize the opportunity to throw the Stonehenge tunnels in the bin – where they belong.”
The coalition will present a petition with 240,000 signatures from 147 countries to Labour’s transport and culture secretaries on Monday afternoon, urging them to abandon or reconsider the plans and instead build a longer tunnel further away from the site.
