We had a big win on the 4thy July as Country Durham fought off the climate cults attempts to build a vast solar installation. Grass roots resistance like this is probably why the enemy are regrouping to try and figure out to quash the rebellious spirit of the people here. Well, we ain’t giving up without a fight and in fact it does look like the tide is turning we just have to keep putting on the pressure. A war is won with the culmination of many victories in battle. Reform are joining our side but we can’t just rely on them, we have to do the work. 

The campaign in County Durham began with residents like Janice Ferguson, who articulated a visceral concern: the solar farm would transform their rural landscape into an industrial zone, complete with fencing, CCTV, and security lighting. This imagery resonated, painting the project as an intrusion on community identity. Activists tapped into fears about losing agricultural land, emphasising the cultural and economic value of farming. By framing the solar farm as a threat to local livelihoods residents were able to defeat the climate cult.

Resident Janice Ferguson said her family would become “prisoners in our own home” if the solar farm went ahead.

“In every direction we will be surrounded by wire fencing, security lighting and CCTV cameras,” she told the Local Democracy Reporting Service.

“We will have to endure at least a year of dust and drilling while 90,000 panels are piledriven into the ground all around us.”

Key to the success was leveraging local political figures. Local MP Grahame Morris amplified the campaign’s message, lending credibility and access to council processes. His involvement shows the power of aligning with sympathetic elected officials who can navigate bureaucratic channels. The campaign also benefited from Reform UK’s vocal presence, which, while polarising, energised turnout at public consultations, like the November 2024 event at Ludworth Community Centre. This mix of grassroots passion and political backing kept pressure on Durham County Council.

Tactically, the opposition focused on tangible impacts—visual blight, restricted land access, and quality-of-life concerns. They submitted 24 formal objections, each grounded in planning regulations, forcing the council to confront practical issues. The rejection decision, reported by The Northern Echo, hinged on these localised arguments, proving that councils can be swayed when community voices are unified and precise.

For us, the lesson is clear: anchor our campaigns in local priorities, build coalitions with influential allies, and frame objections in terms planners can’t ignore. Hare Hill shows that persistence and strategic focus can turn community sentiment into a decisive victory, even against formidable development pressures.