HAVING taken note of the Navitus debate in Parliament on Wednesday, July 10, I find it extraordinary that Connor Burns now wants to tell us all that the Minister for Culture did not answer his questions (Daily Echo, July 12).

Specifically Mr Burns and colleague MPs from Dorset pressed the point on the impact of proposed Navitus wind farm on Dorset Heritage Coast, citing a letter from IUCN.

In reply to this critical point it is impossible to see how the minister could have been clearer.

To quote: “Let me make it absolutely clear that the letter was from the IUCN, which is a UNESCO advisory body – so the letter does not give UNESCO’s opinion on the world heritage status of the Jurassic coast.”

UNESCO being the authoritative body which determines world heritage site status. The minister then makes clear: “Currently, the world heritage property (the Dorset coast) is not considered by UNESCO to be under threat, and it is not in immediate danger of losing its world heritage status.”

The minister making the key point that the ‘heritage interest’ of the coast is in the rock formations of the cliff structures: “It is important to stress that the Jurassic coast is a world heritage site not on the basis of its natural setting, but on that of its unique geological interest.”

His concluding statement to the Dorset MPs said: “Unfortunately, from the perspective of my honourable friends, its (English Heritage’s) current advice is that the offshore wind farm would not have an undue adverse effect.”

Connor Burns MP and colleagues clearly did not hear what they wanted to hear but the answers are certainly there.

But then this is the MP who wants to cast many decades of world climate science as mere ideology, so what can you say when anyone, let alone an MP, is so hugely resistant to listening to science, or even his own government ministers?

JEFF WILLIAMS, Jubilee Road, Parkstone