In 2002 development company Ampersand acquired the old Cornwall Coliseum and announced plans in the local press to develop the site into a huge leisure and holiday complex. During a public meeting called to reassure concerned local residents, Mark Frazer, vice-chairman of a local residents’ association, challenged Ampersand to meet members of the community. The public relations advantages to the developer were clear and it was arranged that a Focus Group would be held.

Several interested locals came forward but it was soon recognised that as well as regular meetings with Ampersand, they needed a separate forum to air the issues. Carlyon Bay Watch (CBW) was formed as an umbrella group for the various residents' associations and to assess local feeling and to establish an informal mandate for action and support, it organised a petition calling for a public inquiry into the proposals. A total of 929 signatures were gathered (more than 800 of those from the Carlyon Bay area), a high proportion of local households. As the implications of the development became clear, CBW hardened into a single issue pressure group committed to opposing the Ampersand project.

The core membership all bring to the group an area of expertise from local knowledge, geological experience, media and marketing expertise to an understanding of planning laws and consents and local government protocols.

CBW wrote to all the organisations likely to be affected by or to have interest in the Beach development, such as statutory consultees, the local council, the Ombudsman, the Advertising Standards Authority, our local MP, local papers. But the public face of the campaign was an attempt to try to draw wider attention to what was happening.

Press coverage

The breakthrough came when we finally snagged the interest of the national media. In July 2003 a small group of us took a minibus to Plymouth to present the petition of 929 signatures to the Government Office of the South West (GOSW) calling for a public inquiry.This event really began the campaign in earnest as it attracted the attention of local and national press and broadcast media including The Guardian, Breakfast Television, Spotlight, BBC News and Radio 4.

Bolstered by the tremendous local support behind the petition that summer, we organised an Information and Awareness Day in November 2003, which was well attended . This entailed an exhibition of some of the cautionary information we had uncovered during the campaign to date and it was given credibility by a panel of local experts who contributed to an open debate on the issues that evening.

In January 2004, the developer closed the public access road to the beach so in February CBW organised a demonstration to exercise our right to access and convene on the beach. We organised a piper to head the column and, in spite of the weather, had a rousing turnout of over 350 supporters and plenty of interest from the press. The profile of the CBW point of view was being raised.

In June 2004 Restormel Borough Councillors listened to nearly three hours of debate about the proposals for the revised sea wall and beach re-charge proposals at the Beach development. It was notable that the few voices who spoke in favour of the proposals came from local hoteliers, tradespeople and investors who might fairly be thought to have some commercial interest in the outcome of the meeting. However, the prevailing mood was a huge groundswell of support for a Public Inquiry among the large number who attended.

On 30th October 2005 CBW held a second successful and well attended Information and Awareness day on the Beach plans, exploring topics such as ‘Flood Risk’, ‘Transport Impacts’ and ‘Local Ecology’. There was a steady stream of visitors all afternoon and at 7:30pm the hall was packed for an audio visual presentation by CBW. Yet again, the CBW community mandate was confirmed by the attendance and the supportive tenor of the crowd.

We began experiencing success on four key fronts - pushing for a public inquiry, arguing for access, challenging the Ampersand public relations effort ( with our own steady stream of press releases ) and in monitoring, taking feedback and reporting back on the general impact of the development.

We encouraged everyone with interest in exploring the ramifications of the development plans to write to the office of the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, then responsible for local development issues. After initially saying that it was not needed, in August 2004 GOSW finally called a Public Inquiry. Although we have no confirmation of it, it felt as if all the attention and letters had affected this change of opinion. The developer subsequently sidestepped the scrutiny of an inquiry by withdrawing the two add-on planning applications the inquiry was to investigate, but we still regard this as a success.

The background research members have put in has also been vital. One member tracked down a piece of legislation designed to protect areas like our beach and submitted an application to register part of Carlyon Bay Beach as a Village Green. CBW members helped collect the evidence statements and they amounted to 63% of the households in the catchment of the Village Green which is a first for an application of this kind. Owing to the care and thoroughness with which the case was prepared, it was decided that this too, merited a public inquiry. Unfortunately the case was deemed not made. This was a disappointment to very many local people and visitors who had contributed but we soon realised that the louder voice is the regional and national one. The wider issue is that of long term coastal management.

CBW has been considering the implications of proposed sea defences on the whole of the coastal area. Based on our research and article after article in the national press warning about global warming we believe this project should never be built. That is now the focus of the campaign.

All the research on this and the other issues was collected together and formed the backbone of our website which was originally launched in September 2003. We set out to make it factual and objective in tone, to create a resource. It has been another invaluable tool in the campaign. Not only has email allowed us to spread information, conduct research and communicate with each other and the media quickly and easily, but the web site has drawn more support. We have had support emails from all over UK and made contact with other environmentally motivated campaigns across the country. It also allows the media complete access to our point of view. We hope this means we are fairly represented.

The main challenges of a campaign like this are several.

We are a not for profit company funded by donations and raffles. Members contribute in their own way by not reclaiming expenses for things like telephone calls, stamps, stationery, photocopying and travelling expenses. One member, a successful local businessman, donated office space and a phone line which made regular meetings possible as well as providing the vital administrative backup to field media inquiries. Others outside the core group contribute time by helping to deliver regular newsletters and these in turn bring in more donations. In this way our costs and expenses have been extremely light.