The Public Inquiry continued through last week and finally ended on Tuesday 20th July. The last days were filled with more cross-examination, representations from interested 3rd parties, an extensive site visit and closing arguments from each barrister.

Witnesses last week included more of the Southwark planning officers responsible for compiling the case against the moorings. Most time was reserved for the case officer who was made to explain in detail the negative opinions he has of the moorings. At one point he admitted that he likes the moorings gardens, doesn’t dislike the bertholders and has nothing against commercial or historic ships. This left him at a loss to explain what it is about our moorings that he doesn’t like.

This is the case officer who had not visited the moorings, nor spoken to any residents, before writing his proof. Much was made of the fact that no needs assessment was done before the eviction notices were sent and that the policy sections used to justify the decision were inaccurate and in contradiction to sections of Ken Livingstone's London Plan and Blue Ribbon plan for the River Thames.

During three separate sessions, time was made for members of the public and representatives of interested organisations to state their opinions. Unfortunately some important moorings supporters did not manage to attend the sessions, but nevertheless there were some hugely supportive comments from many supporters including The Inland Waterways Association, CRISP, Heritage Afloat, and Simon Hughes MP. The comment gave the Inspector a better understanding of the importance and significance of the decision he must make. Comments from local residents opposed to the moorings were heard as well as from local residents convinced that a compromise is possible.

Thursday saw an excellent presentation by Paul Inman of the moorings about the amount of support we have gathered for the preservation of the moorings - well over 3000 signatures and letters. The Inspector complimented him on the quality and clarity of the data.

Monday's site visits saw the Inspector and his entourage tour flats and boats at different times of tide to assess the impact of our development. The moorings were viewed from all vantage points and especially in the context of the conservation areas and cityscape views that it is alleged to affect. A trip to Blackwell basin to inspect a more formal but non-residential mooring was also included.

The final day had Southwark’s barrister and our barrister presenting their final conclusions. Southwark simply restated their case. Our barrister made a special point of explaining several points of planning law that are in our favour and the human rights issues which must play a major part in any decision. Unfortunately the barrister representing the flat residents did not attend the Inquiry on this day so we didn't hear his conclusions.

Almost a year to the day since we received our eviction notices the Inspector closed the Inquiry and left to begin making a decision. This decision could be with us within 4 weeks. The first week of September is the latest it will arrive. The decision could call for the moorings to close or a major reconfiguration or down-sizing, both of which will cause chaos. The best case scenario is for the moorings to be left as they but to be managed by a strict set of codes and conditions to control growth, noise and appearance. Surely this is the most sensible solution?