A High Court judge has rejected an attempt by West Norfolk Council to force a legal challenge over the proposed incinerator at King’s Lynn.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

West Norfolk Council had hoped to secure a judicial review into the decision by environment secretary Caroline Spelman to award £91m in PFI credits to go towards the cost of the Willows Power and Recycling Plant, which would be run by Anglo-US consortium Cory Wheelabrator.

Norfolk County Council says the Saddlebow plant, which its planning committee last month granted permission for, is needed to deal with the county’s waste. But, in a poll organised by West Norfolk Council, 65,000 people voted against it and the borough council sought a judicial review over the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ decision to award the waste credits.

However, Mr Justice Eady has announced that he has refused permission for that judicial review.

He stated: “There is no arguable case on irrationality or illegality. The claimant’s case goes essentially to the merits of the decision which was reached after a long and detailed consideration of all relevant factors.”

The borough council had questioned how Ms Spelman had been convinced, after seeking extra information from Norfolk councils that there was a “broad consensus” of support for the Norfolk Waste Partnership.

But Mr Justice Eady said: “The argument...appears to be based on a misreading of ‘broad consensus’ as though it connoted unanimity.”

He said the borough council must pay DEFRA’s costs, to be decided by the courts, if not agreed by the parties involved.

Although the county council’s planning committee agreed to grant permission for the plant, communities secretary Eric Pickles prevented the authority from issuing a decision notice.

He told the county council that he wants more time to consider whether to call in their decision. If he does, that would mean a planning inspector would look at the issue through a public inquiry.

See tomorrow’s EDP for more on this story.

24 comments

  • 'Consultant' Richard Burton has cleared 'trained' the West Norfolk masses well on his 'opinion' of mass burn incinerators. To point out, Incineration is actually one of the cheapest methods of treatment for larger volumes of waste, at around 60% the cost of MBT (thus why a Tory Council would choose it) so don't believe the nonsense about it wasting tax payers money - consider the £80 per tonne (floor) on landfill tax from 201415 and calculate the cost to the tax payer without this technology over 25 years. Daisy comments about the NIMBYs dying down once its operational are spot on - its the same 12 people or so who make the negative comments on every article. Pickles will 100% sign this off as he eventually did in Cornwall last month, and has historically done elsewhere. It fits with the National Waste Strategy - which was developed by a Labour Government (FYI).

    Report this comment

    Yorkshire

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • Daubney must have put together a pretty empty case to appease Murphy, the weakest link exposed - goodbye.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Yes, The Tory party will wonder what hit them next county and general elections. Pickles is close to Spelman and the deal has been done. I hope people take note from Pauline Johnson that Norfolk people are like sheep. Prove her wrong and dump the Tories.

    Report this comment

    Alan Allan

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Yorkshire, I don't think anyone could describe mass burn as "green energy". Also the relative cost of MBT and AD have not been explored. Also I can't subscribe to your argument about KL being on a flood plain therefore its acceptable to build a huge incinerator producing toxic materials, in this context, particularly the fly and bottom ash, which would be especially vulnerable in the event of flooding.

    Report this comment

    norfolkngood

    Thursday, July 19, 2012

  • Mr Hall -Myself. And no good arguing with antis but Honest John surely the last time this site flooded was in 1953? The beet factory never had a problem. And Lynn council has had no problem wasting millions cleaning up the muck works site and then building a rather down market lot of housing on a site which is also in the area flooded in 1953 so they can't be too concerned about the flood risks. The comment about steam refers to complaints about emissions from unrelated installations which do only release steam-people will think to protest only if they can see visible evidence. If this had been proposed for Watton or Wymondham no one in Lynn would have made a peep and the anti figures would have been lower because they are smaller towns. Either we have an elected council doing what it is elected to do or everything goes to a referendum. Perhaps this was important enough for a whole county vote, but in that case so is the NDR. I wonder how many people sitting nicely in Lynn who voted against the incinerator gave a thought to residents of West Norfolk villages who in the past endured for years reeking and sometimes smoking heaps of refuse sent to landfill? if localism was taken further the residents of Blackborough End should be able to tell people from Wootton where to put their rubbish.

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • Dear Daisy , who are your employers?

    Report this comment

    norman hall

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • Is this the same democratically elected council that has plunged Norfolk's taxpayers £530Million in debt, through their wise spending? "emissions, such as steam" you sound genned up enough to be one of the voters on the Planning Committee. It's a site that according to the Defra-funded Environment Agency, that can flood with only1 hour's notice, described by John Boldon as the best he's seen. This has nothing to do with value for money for the taxpayer, and you know it, just like we all do. 66 per cent of Norfolk's Parish Councils hardly smacks of local opposition either. "Whether or not it turns out to be mostly harmless." You are truly delightful, bought and paid for, no doubt.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • UK style democracy at work.

    Report this comment

    norman hall

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • There were strong arguments to support the KLWNBC case.They were essentially that there was no long term waste strategy that was reflected in the waste incinerator project, as required by Defra criteria, because the waste strategy had rejected incineration.The further argument was that the Defra criteria required that the proposed solution promoted recycling. It is well known that waste incineration depresses recyling rates. Do we know that KLWNBC actually advanced these arguments? Do we know how sound its legal team was? Were its lawyers actually sufficiently experienced in this kind of High Court challenge? I hope that we shall be told.

    Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Daisy. Full marks for your arguments, but they ignore the fact that the decision was made to invest in this dirty technology before any consultation started . Your argument is based more on the politics than the risks inherent in mass burn technology. There will be emissions of dioxins and furans and also particulates. These will be largely invisible and will ground around the incinerator on the land and populace of King's Lynn. There will also be the transport of fly and bottom ash which is also very toxic. This ash is so fine it is very difficult to contain. Again it will be emitted to the local environment on the transport routes. I regret the impacts on the environment and accountability.

    Report this comment

    norfolkngood

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • Daisy Roots, I understand your need to be antagonising, but do at least try to keep up with facts and common sense, rather than spout the same twaddle as John ‘PR’ Boldon. For starters the beet factory did not convert a relatively harmless product into a potentially toxic by-product, store it outside exposed to the elements in a flat landscape, surrounded by farmer’s land and watercourses leading into the rivers and out to The Wash. Secondly, it would appear you are unfamiliar with the rising sea levels and increase storm surges, which in combination with inadequate flood defences, admitted in NCC reports, the lack of critical maintenance by the EA on the removal of silt which is by the way contaminated with dioxins, but keep that quiet as the EA don’t want that out, reducing the capacity of the Ouse by around 50%, the in-operation of Denver Big Eye, preventing flushing of silt, and drainage of water build up, which led to the flooding of the Ouse Washes killing off a whole generation of breeding birds, leaves King’s Lynn and its surroundings including this site critically under protected, just like Gt Yarmouth. One only has to think of the torrential rain we have had today to know the IBA would be washed into the ditches and watercourses, but to you that’s ok. As for installations in King’s Lynn that only release steam, please do be more forthcoming. Cory told the public at a meeting that only steam would come out of the incinerator stack. I think it was Morston Assets at South Lynn, although granted it’s a fine line between where they start and the BC end, and they didn’t quite spend as many millions cleaning up as they should have done, did they? I think you’ll find the council were not elected to trouser money from dinosaur deals. I would imagine the people around Blackborough are rightly annoyed that the council have wasted so many years and £millions trying to inflict an incinerator on somewhere in Norfolk rather than actually address the problem as we asked back in 2008, neatly falling on deaf ears. Talking of the NDR, why does all the county’s money get spent on improving the east of the county? How many everyday people in Norwich have even heard of the proposed incinerator, very few who I’ve spoken to, they are sick of reading the EDP and listening to the news, because of selective reporting, and the county taking no notice of them. Roll on May 2013, and we can hopefully turn around the people of Norfolk’s apathy and vote in some decent folk.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Thursday, July 19, 2012

  • You can't get rid of Daubney, honest John. The next elections are the County Elections in 2013. He is a Borough Councillor. But the people of Norfolk would do well to get rid of every County Councillor who did not actively oppose the Incinerator. Otherwise that won't be the last incinerator and it won't be the last nasty thing to happen to Norfolk. Can you remember such a terrible time for Norfolk before the Tories were in charge? No, because it all started when they took over the reins and started making the most unholy mess. Roll on the elections and let's hope the people of Norfolk aren't as stupid as the rest of the country think we are.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Another "stitch-up" to add to the list. But - stitches do come undone!

    Report this comment

    disolushund

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Daisy Roots please be more forthcoming on which installations in King’s Lynn only release steam.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Thursday, July 19, 2012

  • A few people in Norwich are desparate to spend £500M of our money on an out of date piece of junk that is not wanted. Why do they want to spend more than double what is necessary when cheaper solutions are so much better? If a JR is not permitted there should be a public enquiry. Its about time DEFRA & NCC faced some scrutiny.

    Report this comment

    Voter 65,516

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Daisy Roots, I take your lack of reply as an inability to back up another of your hot air comments.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Saturday, July 21, 2012

  • Daisy - can you explain what you mean when you say "No good arguing with the antis" please? Are you looking to smear people like me because we don't share the same views as you?

    Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • Daisy. It is the Environmental Agency that stipulate incinerators should not be built in flood zone 3. Cory Wheelabrator has put flood zone one on their planning application when it is three! This is one of the reasons there has been a record number of consultations periods. CW are either rookies or trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Mrs Johnson highlighted this at County Hall the day of the predetermined planning meeting. Baarrrrr

    Report this comment

    Alan Allan

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • The whole of KL has been built on a flood plain so i can't see that as a sensible argument against the incinerator. There is clearly no point in the anti-brigade carrying on: a) This government and the last have incineration (green energy) at the heart of their waste strategy. b) A skewed 'poll' by the borough council and few dozen people with nothing better to do are not going to change their mind about that. c) The cost argument also does not stand up. Over 25 years incinerators cost approx £500m, MBT costs approx £700m. Continuing to landfill will cost much more than both of these options.

    Report this comment

    Yorkshire

    Thursday, July 19, 2012

  • It is just plain daft to put a waste incinerator in a floodplain this is tax-payers money they are playing with. Cabinet members at Norfolk County Council are just lining their own pockets as usual. Every MP in Norfolk against this crazy proposal.

    Report this comment

    Jack

    Wednesday, July 18, 2012

  • Indeed Mr Hall,the democratically elected council for Norfolk makes a decision to help avoid the county having to pay EU landfill-use fines and selects an alternative solution and an appropriate site for the installation. And is not swayed by a referendum for a small part of the county (which had a surprisingly high level of returns, given the usual turn out at elections in the district) Democracy in action in for the whole of Norfolk. If West Norfolk Council had their way it would not have been democracy at all, just localism. I suggest that the incinerator will be built and unless it makes a lot of visible emissions, such as steam, no one will think about it much again once the hoo ha dies down. And that local developers and those wanting to sell their homes will rue the day Daubney started the campaign, because every web search for Lynn will throw up the hysteria about the incincerator, whether or not it turns out to be mostly harmless.

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • The end of the Tory party stronghold in west Norfolk.

    Report this comment

    Choice

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Tory central office needs to spend a day with shoppers in Kings Lynn to get the full picture. My crystal ball says Tory meltdown in West Norfolk.

    Report this comment

    wattonlad

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

  • Who said anything about elections alecto? What use is he to the people of West Norfolk now? He's played safe with Murphy rather than fight for the people, now comes his judgement day, as I said exposed.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Tuesday, July 17, 2012

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Sunny

Sunny

max temp: 10°C

min temp: 6°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT