Norfolk incinerator: political analysis

By Shaun Lowthorpe, Public affairs correspondent Saturday, January 29, 2011
11:00 AM

Understanding the politics behind the King’s Lynn incinerator is a bit like watching smoke rising from a chimney stack and trying to guess which direction it might go in – you think you know where it’s going, but you’re still not sure where it will end up. Particularly when the political winds keep changing direction.

Of course, we have read the claims and counter-claims about the science, but what do we make of the politics? Well, the question is “At what level do you want to start?”.

Maybe it is with the EU, whose landfill tax directives mean that we cannot keep burying our rubbish in the ground – or rather we can, but will be heavily fined for doing so.

Or perhaps our own government, in the shape of Defra, which has awarded Norfolk County Council £169m of PFI credits to progress the incinerator idea?

Or is it our own elected county councillors, who have plumped for the Cory Wheelabrator plans after months of deliberation, firstly through a project board and then review panels to the cabinet and council, to get to where they are today?

The county council probably would not have been here at all had its previous hopes for an incinerator at Costessey all gone to plan. But the so-called contract A project fell to pieces, not because of the vigorous and effective campaigning of local Lib Dem and Green councillors, nor the well-organised NAIL2 (Norfolk Against Incineration and Landfill), but because the-then contractor wanted to build on a site which, legally, it could not.

The political pressure cooled down when a second option to build a plant, this time a form of industrial composting known as anaerobic digestion, was next proposed for Costessey. The scheme was to be the first of two sites built in the county, with the second to be in either east or west Norfolk.

It was in this atmosphere that local leaders in both Great Yarmouth and King’s Lynn expressed an interest in having a second, and crucially, smaller, plant in their backyard.

But when that proposal fell because of rising costs, ultimately taking with it the-then county council cabinet member for the environment Ian Monson, who paid the political price for the failure, all the chips were were then placed on the second scheme, which became the Saddlebow proposal.

And some of those initially favourable views started to alter when the proposals became larger in scale to what some of those initially keen on the idea expected.

The Lib Dems and Greens are less of a force in West Norfolk, though they’ve given the fight a go, but the politics behind this incinerator are markedly different, and a lot of the power tussles seem to be taking place among the local Conservatives.

The Tory-run county council has opted for the incinerator. Yet there are tensions with the Conservative group at West Norfolk council, a fact made even more remarkable by the presence of so many twin-hatters sitting on both authorities.

North West Norfolk MP Henry Bellingham has spoken out against the plans, and the borough is organising a referendum to gauge local views on February 14. Some Tories have even spoken privately of trying to get the site shifted to Breckland. Yet are these differences real or imagined?

There is another date which is concentrating minds – the local elections on May 5, and the palpable fear that the borough elections could turn into a single issue anti-incinerator contest, when the incinerator decision is nothing to do with the borough council.

We have already had the first suggestion of anti-incinerator candidates putting themselves forward.

Some county councillors have suggested asking if the government could make the incinerator planning decision, but that request appears to have been rebuffed by the cabinet, following legal advice from the council’s head of law.

So with the threat of EU fines looming, and the prospect of up to £20.5m in compensation if the scheme fails to get past the planning hurdle, it is hard to see how the county council has left itself any political alternative other than to stay the course and see where it takes them.

Latest News

5 comments

We need incentives and goals to force and encourage industry at the same time to use recycled materials, we need to have a major look at creating zero waste sites with anaerobic composting next to it together with other companies re-using theses resources. There should be a reuse shop on all of these sites and those who bring their waste resources should get the market price reimbursed for what they deposit. For this a guranateed market and goals need establishing by our ConDem Government. I agree with Dillan May is the time to decide, but the decisions need taking nationally, so I would choose a 'truly' Independent candidate, able and engaged who will oppose this Tory led proposal and who will not jump into their camp once the elections are over but stay true to his mandate.

Report this comment

ingo wagenknecht

Monday, January 31, 2011
Bis Brother always seems to win in such cases as this

Report this comment

Albert Cooper

Sunday, January 30, 2011
In 1999, Wheelabrator agreed to pay a $25,000 fine and spend $91,000 to establish a mercury recycling program, after federal environmental officials accused the company of violating the Clean Air Act in North Andover. Wheelabrator’s parent company, Waste Management Inc., has run into more serious trouble in the past with regulators, both in Massachusetts and elsewhere in the country. Under a settlement with the state attorney general’s office in 2000 and 2001, the company agreed to pay more than $1 million in back wages owed to trash haulers in Massachusetts and throughout New England after allegedly violating the state’s prevailing wage law. A decade ago, a three-year federal investigation of Waste Management’s financial practices nationwide uncovered a culture of accounting fraud that inflated the company’s income by more than $1 billion over four years. The Arthur Andersen accounting firm spent millions on a settlement with the government, while Waste Management paid more than $450 million to settle a resulting class-action lawsuit. NCC are wasting tax-payers money. SUPPORT OUR NORFOLK FARMERS. SAY NO TO INCINERATION please sign online petition at www.klwin.com

Report this comment

Maggie

Saturday, January 29, 2011
I think many people are confused because they know landfill has to finish. The nasty side of this is their will be more landfill with incineration. There is bottom ash and fly ash. The less toxic ash used for the building industry. Not many building blocks been used in the last 4 years with the recession. Complaints from residents of chemical smells emitted from foot paths and roads where this ash has been used even though it is mixed with bitumen especially in hot weather. Why is it at the moment some inexperienced councils pushing incineration. Their answer is the financial benefits, because landfill tax on ash is £2.50 per ton compared to £48 per ton for normal waste. Tax on ash will be increasing soon because the more alarming reason is there will be a glut of it. This is when we get a hike in our council tax. Now the toxic ash. This is transported in sealed containers to wait for it LANDFILL. This nasty substance is so bad that it is a health hazard and now dumped in Cheshire’s salt mines. This is the ash that cannot be filtered out. This is the ash that stays in your body for life. What is the greener and safer alternative what most well respected councils use? This is Mechanical Biological Treatment, short for recycling. Used in Scotland and the Northwest of England. Manchester have built five of these plants, Cambridge. All of these are aiming for zero waste with incineration could never achieve. Most Mechanical Biological treatment plants are built by Shanks Wheelabrator?

Report this comment

Choice

Saturday, January 29, 2011
So the above article suggests utter chaos and disregard by our Councillors, who strangly appear to have gone to ground of late!. I would suggest May elections are an ideal chance and possible the only one to have a public say on such miss management of the largest Norfolk project to date. Let's hope The White Witch of Norfolk is sent packing back to Swaffham.

Report this comment

dillan

Saturday, January 29, 2011