Councillors to vote again on whether to ditch Norfolk incinerator

The proposed incinerator site at Saddlebow. Picture: Ian Burt. The proposed incinerator site at Saddlebow. Picture: Ian Burt.

Thursday, March 20, 2014
10:02 AM

Councillors will vote next month at an extraordinary meeting of Norfolk County Council on whether to axe the controversial incinerator proposed at King’s Lynn.

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

With communities secretary Eric Pickles yet to decide whether to ratify planning permission for the plant at Saddlebow, opponents of the scheme want the council to vote on whether to scrap it.

The meeting, which will take place on Monday, April 7, follows a request by councillors Toby Coke (UKIP), Independents Richard Bird and Alexandra Kemp, Tim East (Liberal Democrat), Andrew Boswell (Green) and John Dobson (Conservative).

The council will consider:

• Whether, in view of the delay in the Secretary of State’s planning decision in relation to the Willows, it wishes to recommend to cabinet that the contract is allowed to terminate to avoid an increase in the compensation figure, currently capped at £20.3m

• And whether or not, if planning is granted, it recommends to cabinet to continue to implement the revised project

The meeting will be followed on the same day by an extra meeting of the controlling Labour/Liberal Democrat cabinet to consider any recommendation that may arise from the council meeting.

In October, Norfolk County Council voted, by 40 votes to 38, to agree to a revised project plan for the burner at King’s Lynn.

But the extraordinary meeting will give councillors another say on whether the plant, which has been hugely controversial, should go ahead, although the final decision will rest with the council’s cabinet.

The council has already agreed a contract with Cory Wheelabrator to run the plant and had awarded planning permission for it.

But that was called in by Mr Pickles, leading to a public inquiry last year. Mr Pickles has the inspector’s report and recommendation, but has yet to make a decision on whether to allow that permission.

Meanwhile, the government has cancelled waste credits which would have been worth £169m over the lifetime of the plant.

Reports drawn up by council officers say the possible compensation payable to Cory Wheelabrator if planning permission is not secured would increase by £5m, from £26m to £31m after May 1.

A number of councillors had claimed they had not been made aware of that, ahead of last October’s vote.

63 comments

  • A continuous stream of drivel continues to emanate from D. We all need to consciously uncouple from him.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014

  • I'm a little surprised at the lack of confidence in Eric Pickles.He is a self-proclaimed localist who is part of the greenest government ever.What could possibly go wrong?

    Report this comment

    Peter Watson

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • Eric’s decision on the proposed incinerator will have devastating effect on the future of the Tory Party in west Norfolk. An incinerator chimney at the gateway to Norfolk will remind the public to think carefully at the ballot box. Defra has rejected the burner and gave many reasons such as shortage of feedstock and the SOS should take notice of their concerns. Norfolk is more vulnerable especially when surrounding counties are struggling to feed their burners or face penalty charges to rich incinerator companies. Labour has lost a golden opportunity to dominate west Norfolk by being taken in by bizarre statements from NCC officials and some County Councillors. Just like the Tony Blair’s 45 minutes to war speech equivalent to support the burner or face county bankruptcy.

    Report this comment

    Alan Allan

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014

  • Gnobbs has remained very quiet on whether it will be a free vote and no party whipping, they must all be pretty s.cared now. When are NCC going to provide Councillors with the t.ruthful costs of going ahead with this project, or are we going to see pages of confusion put in front of them a couple of days beforehand? Are any of the 40 councillors who voted to continue the RPP in October interested in the truth or will they blindly follow Borat again?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • Ingo is highlighting the 2008 survey (future of Norfolk’s waste, NCC075258, 59) compiled by Mott Macdonald for NCC. They identified 95.51% of participants surveyed from all corners of Norfolk rejected incineration. This was comparable with the Borough referendum of 92% incinerator rejection. The planning application was much worse as CW canvassed for long hours outside Tesco’s Aylsham for support after being turfed out of Waitrose Swaffham for misleading the public. CW were let down badly by supporters as they were conspicuous by their absence. Three supporters managed to turn up at the public inquiry, but checking comments in the planning consultation period for supporting and objecting their names were nowhere to be seen.

    Report this comment

    LynBin

    Sunday, March 23, 2014

  • Mr Plucker the ability for anything to shock any member of the public from within county hall vanished on 7th March 2011 when the rabid dog was revealled to all in attendence. I have virtually lost interest in the mass burn incinerator, I presented evidence to the inquiry and the process will run its course. My interest is with county wide ab.use of power and abu.se of planning regs. A fine example came to light -not connected to the incineator- today. County wide people need to realise that unless they watch and question every decision NCC make the tax payer will be well and truely out of pocket with ever diminishing public services.

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014

  • there is nothing green about the green bank deal with CW, its a tragedy and I hope that many of you will make it clear to them that their decision is risky and unsupported.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Well, it's clear that the Councils committee, sub committee and Cabinet that has agreed the new policy to build an incineration unit is an excellent plan but in view of some of the doubts being expressed and thus there were some unrecorded and lost proposals that it would be best dealt with via a Planning Inspector and ultimately through the Secretary of States Office. After careful consideration, the considered view of the Committee, Sub Committee, Cabinet and Full Council was that while they considered that the proposal met with broad approval in principle, that some of the principles were sufficiently fundamental in principle and some of the considerations so complex and finely balanced in practice, that, in principle, it was proposed that the sensible and prudent practice would be to submit the proposal for more detailed consideration, laying stress on the essential continuity of the new proposal with existing principles, and the principle of the principle arguments which the proposal proposes and propounds for their approval, in principle. That said they await the considerations of the Ministerial decision in order to advance the current status and complete the sequence in a timely manner.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • The incinerators gainsayers are having a good time. Hard luck all you cackhanded supporters who couldn't argue your way out of a wet paperbag. Good to hear from you Ingo. From the heart as usual. We know where the supporters speak from.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Sunday, March 23, 2014

  • On this occasion have faith in Eric Pickles.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • Spent most of my time in London. Despite the rumours that circulate in Norfolk you do not need a passport to go there but beware it is past Ely so for many it will be the same as being abroad. You will need to brush up on the local language which is English and some strange customs such as politeness and good manners may take some getting used to. Dress formal or smart casual. No Wellington boots or flat caps. Things will cost more than a Pound and they drive sober on the left as opposed to inebriated in the middle of the road.

    Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • Petty side swipe from wan.kgenknecht who like most on the anti side only want their side heard and no one else's. We all know the sort. Off you run to the moderators with another groan about nothing.

    Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Sunday, March 23, 2014

  • @disolushund, also the information that is released might be somewhat exaggerated or indeed completely incorrect...ie misinformation. Consider Timmins, the acting Finance Officer(or has he now been actually approved?), and his assurance that NCC will go bankrupt! Blatant scaremongering and complete rubbish(no pun intended)! It will also be interesting to see if everybody turns up to vote too, and no one decides on a loo break at the vital moment the vote is taken - I wonder if the loos have been fixed?...they were broken at the time of the last vote....!

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • You`re playing D`s game. Pointless. I do agree with him on one point though.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • And here go the anti mob with their usual unpleasant remarks. How very 'Norfolk'. Can't wait to hear how they turn on poor Eric. They have to be nice for now. Just wait. They are so sad and predictable.

    Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • Is it a free vote or are the leaders going to have their whips out?

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Quite right Ingo, and we still wonder such such a contract with such a company was chosen.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Monday, March 24, 2014

  • When is the penny finally going to drop that this incinerator is about as necessary and useful as a chocolate teapot? And with the new Chief Executive or whatever they style themselves as being part of the Weapons of Mass Destruction brigade that swarmed round Blair we will now be getting some pretty daft excuses for an incinerator.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • I do not accept that any Labour Party member would use the whip on Kemp although she has complained loudly enough about it. I think we know what the 7th is about and the result will be greater than before in favour.

    Report this comment

    Jack Bantoft

    Tuesday, March 25, 2014

  • It is not a question of whips within the Council or any internal government structure. The actual decision was made some time ago by the Councillors and in turn this has now to be further ratified because of a fragment of the Councils Constitution which is being exploited by a few internal political irritants. Full Council are in complete agreement and that fact is recorded by Officers and officials. The council has to rely on the professionalism of its Officers at all times. It is characteristic of all NCC committee discussions and decisions that every serving member has complete and vivid recollection of them, and that every member's recollection of them differs vehemently from every other member's recollection. Consequently one must accept the convention that the official decisions are those and only those which have been officially recorded in the minutes by the Officers and officials from which it emerges with elegant inevitability, that any decision which has been officially reached would have been officially recorded in the minutes by the officials, and any decision which is not recorded in the minutes by the Officers and officials has not been officially reached, even if one or more members believe they can recollect it. So in any particular case, if the decision would have been officially reached, it would have been recorded in the minutes by the officials and if it isn't it wasn't. In this case it did and therefore it has. The next vote will be dealt with in much the same way. Simple as that.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • You don't half talk some nonsense.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • It now seems that since Lloyds Bank pulled out of (very sensible of them) the financing has been passed to UK Green Investment Bank plc! Please tell me how can a so called "Green" Bank consider financing a dirty, stinking mass burn incinerator? They obviously don't have the full story - yet!

    Report this comment

    Sandy.L

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • @Dic%ens....I guess we will find out on the 7th...by the way, what on earth are you drinking....or sniffing.....??

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • Nice move. Use the former to achieve the latter. Works every time.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Thanks B Ungatory, I read that.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • I remember the great incinerator survey of 1986 held at the Lions Head in Winchester. 112 people canvassed. Again 100% in favour of building them as the best way to deal with waste. Clean and efficient. The survey was conducted under strict scrutiny by the Chairman of the Bowls Club and it also revealed that 95% would like to be involved in the building process.

    Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014

  • Dem talking about those who write gibberish ? Takes one to know one. Pot kettle is the phrase I believe.

    Report this comment

    George Peters

    Monday, March 24, 2014

  • Go ahead Jack, betray the voters, wouldn't be the first time, after all it was Labour who designed this idiotic national incineration programm, limping behind the rest of the world by 30 years. We should not expect party politicians to change, whatever colour and regardless what young smiler put his foot over the doorstep at election time, they have presided over this unsustainable regime and are wholly devoid of any new ideas.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Tuesday, March 25, 2014

  • Which part of the world do you live in Del Boy, surely not among us very ‘Norfolk’ people, or are you just another of those who are happy to take what you want from the County despite its people?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • So what you're actually implying Dick.en is that most of our Councillors and your ex - or maybe not ex - compatriots, are pretty brainless people who do not have the capacity to think for themselves. Guess they'll really appreciate that one. You do write some drivel.

    Report this comment

    Sandy.L

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • the meeting on the 7th can only serve 2 purposes. Firstly, give NCC another opportunity to get rid of this incinirator once and for all assuming they are informed of all the correct facts and figures, and secondly restore faith in NCC itself, by making an informed decision.

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • In 1992 at the Flying Horse in Kent they had a survey in the public bar. The results showed that 100% were in favour of Incinerators. The survey was conducted by Landlord who also found that those who were most enthusiastic enjoyed lager in preference to bitter. Very interesting survey though.

    Report this comment

    John Fisher

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014

  • The 7th will be interesting but for all the wrong reasons. There will be some surprises and a couple of shocks. Perhaps one Councillor will say something they may regret.

    Report this comment

    Not A Pheasant Plucker

    Tuesday, March 25, 2014

  • There has been much controversy over the deal to build an incineration facility. Apparently, the fact that campaigners needed to know certain pieces of information was not widely known at the time that the now known need to know was known, therefore those that advise and inform Norfolk Council perhaps felt the information the campaigners wanted to know was not yet fully known and therefore there was no urgency to be informed because the need to know was not, at that time, known. This knowledge has only come about as a result of recent events and the Council appears to have acted in the best interests of all by providing the information it felt was needed on a need to know basis and the FOI requests were dealt with in a timely and professional manner. Habitual complainants have been identified and their obsessive complaints about administrative affairs and certain serving Members and Officers have been carefully noted and the complaints treated with the relevant degree of seriousness. This should be apparent to all elements of the anti campaign by now although it appears to be taking longer than usual in certain instances.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Monday, March 24, 2014

  • Councillors will possibly be advised as to which may be the correct and most educated decision to make when it comes to a vote and they may also be further advised of the Councils position in all this. Fortunately everything is recorded and kept for reference so the Council and its Officers and officials are always able to refer back to earlier parts that together make a whole. Certain Councillors are being reminded of this.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • It is not for Councillors to hold opinions or for the Leaders of the individual Groups to hold opinions either. The main issue is that any perceived opinion that may or may not be seen to be held by any Councillor or Group is translated into the main stream opinion that is held at the time in order to advance the Councils case without which there would be an operational failure in the otherwise smooth running of the government machine. In this instance we see what is a conclusion brought about through a democratic vote being raised once again into the light of the Full Council through the exploitation of the Councils Constitution in order to convey to the electorate that those few who would appear to be at odds with the Councils decision, but are indeed in tune, require a further demonstration of customer loyalty to be seen to be done so to speak.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • @Dic%ens....too much...?

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Too complicated for him. Local.

    Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • my article was pulled for speaking facts and now my posts are moderated on this old thread.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Thursday, March 27, 2014

  • Pot kettle...............

    Report this comment

    George Peters

    Tuesday, March 25, 2014

  • Well Mr Fisher, Kent now have an incinerator at Allington, so perhaps it would be worth doing the survey again. They’ll probably be a lot more sober now they don’t have enough waste to fulfil their contractual tonnage and are desperate for other county’s waste. Oh yes, that’s where NCC are sending waste at the moment, what’s the gate fee if it’s cheaper to transport to Kent rather than go to landfill?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014

  • Have I missed something? How come the compensation is now capped at £20.3 million and at the time of the last vote it was around £26 million rising £31 million if the RPP is extended again? Were the wrong figures provided ahead of that last vote or has there been a reduction?

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Di.ckens what a scary place you live in! Of course cllrs should have an opinion, it should be a view of what is best for every individual that they represent when weighing overall benefit against negative impact. In the case of Willows what is the best financial outcome for the Norfolk taxpayer, and the best life quality outcome for us in the West. The answer in both cases is cancelling the contract and compensating CW there is no contest!!!

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Actually I think about fifty or so votes in favour would be better. No one likes a tight result.

    Report this comment

    Not A Pheasant Plucker

    Tuesday, March 25, 2014

  • Forgot to point out that cllrs ignoring public opinion and supporting CW will hold a very short political office!!! People in Norfolk will no longer sit back and allow their representatives st.ab them in the back!

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • @alecto I think the new Chief ExecutiveComrade will only start her job in August......this incinerator will have been 'binned', so to speak, by then. I wonder during the interview process, no doubt led by the pillar of integrity and righteousness that is G Nobbs, whether he let her know what she is letting herself in for, working for a Leader who is not fit for purpose, inheriting and managing a defunct economic policy, a corrupt political framework, an expensive but useless airfield, and a completely impotent rainbow alliance....but there again she did work for Blair....!

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Just get on and build it!

    Report this comment

    Norfolk John

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Let's finally ditch the wretched thing and get on with life.

    Report this comment

    The man on the Clapham Omnibus

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Another chance to do the right thing and abandon this chapter of those nine people who signed without having planning permission. Still nobody talks of what is really needed, recycling centres are charging us twice to do as they have to by law. Do we really have to wait until the landfill charges are going up, before we find, adopt and activate a solution to our dirty past?

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Dick.ens has very well explained what is wrong with party politics, i.e their appearance, their posing as representatives. This issue will show how much party politics has failed and removed voters from politics, making their five second voting exercise count for very little these days. Far from trusting 9 officers and cllrs. to pollute our lifes, the new chief executive will need and extra sti.ff broom, we should now organise our own waste colections by recyclers who pay us. Last week another large recycling plant started operating making for even less waste to be burned. The need for this backward 1960 incinerator diminishes by the day as more and more companies realies the potential for the future, employing more people than proposed by the env. polluters. Whilst Ms. Smith Constituency loses the best engineering centre in Norfolk, while she enthusiastically supported Mr. Osborne's budget, these companies are creating jobs in modern recycling. The incinerator is useless as it can't deal with landfill waste, those companies and plants who could deal with our past legacy, coming in much cheaper for tax payers, were rejected in favour of the highest, most polluting bidder.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • NCC Council officials and councillors should be aware BAM Nuttall has caused Cambridgeshire council a fortune by their engineering errors. Cory Wheelabrator with years of experience of violations for fraud and pollution linked with an inexperienced construction company does not inspire confidence. Legal action AmeyCespa is currently in the midst of ongoing legal action against BAM Nuttall, the contractor which installed the previous compost turning machinery which failed at the Waterbeach MBT plant. The machinery was manufactured by Austrian firm Kelag Umwelttechnik! Guided busway legal battle with BAM Nuttall settled by Cambridgeshire County Council!

    Report this comment

    Interpol

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Gnobbs says he wants certainty. Here's his chance. Scrap the monstrosity, then we'll know we can certainly save a fortune over the next twenty five years.

    Report this comment

    Barking

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • I am looking forward to 7th April. It will be very interesting to see which of the 9 labour cllrs who rejected the RPP have been int.imidated by the party wh.ip. We know Cllr Kemp was threa.tened but she had the courage to stand up for the people she represents and ex.posed the dishonourable labour group very publicly. If the other 8 have been co.erced the public will undoubtedly turn against the labour party as people want a representative in council to look after their interests not those of the labour group or even worse NCCs pet projects. A committee seat may offer a short term financial benefit but at the end of the day such benefit will be very short term if your voters turn to UKIP, the Greens, the LibDems or the Independent group whos members are free to speak out and vote on behalf of those who elect them to office, without fe.ar of retri.bution, at the next election! On a very light note Cllr Sands should be a sight to behold; in Oct be rejected carrying on with the project, then he whi.ped Cllr Kemp, has he whi.ped himself or will he vote against carrying on with the incinerator?

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Tuesday, March 25, 2014

  • Actually I think EDP plagiarised him from elsewhere. Shaun Kingsbury, chief executive at the UK GIB, said: “Not only will this new facility prevent over a quarter of a million tonnes of waste being sent to landfill each year, it will also generate enough electricity to power over 40,000 homes a year.” Shaun Kingsbury served as an Investment Partner at Hudson Clean Energy Partners, a billion-dollar private equity firm speculating in the 'green energy' market, which will be the reason why Vince Cable put him in charge of handing out £3.8 billion of taxpayers money (your money) to cronies, speculators and chancers all keen to cash-in on greenwashing in the UK. Hudson is run by former high-ranking Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse banksters, and has close links to the US Republican Party, and their 'green' investment activity in the US have sucked in hundreds of millions of dollars of state funds by way of loans, tax breaks, grants, and loan guarantees. In fact the overall US green investment programme is well ahead of the GIB, and has already seen several billion dollars of Govt money lost to bankruptcies and other financial irregularities. So expect the GIB to be doing much the same with your money.

    Report this comment

    B Ungatory

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • As I said, gibberish. Hence it should be ignored.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Monday, March 24, 2014

  • The 7th will be interesting but for all the wrong reasons. I think there will be some surprises and a couple of shocks in store.

    Report this comment

    Not A Pheasant Plucker

    Tuesday, March 25, 2014

  • "A continuous stream of drivel continues to emanate from Demo. We all need to consciously uncouple from him. " That makes much more sense. Run off to moderator and tell your tales now.

    Report this comment

    Not A Nimby

    Wednesday, March 26, 2014

  • B Ungatory what was the quote?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Wow, that’s some serious sh*t you’re smoking Dic.kens old pal.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, March 21, 2014

  • The biggest problem here is whether information is likely to be withheld by officers this time? Also, will we get a repeat of last time when some members of the council voted one way at the council meeting and differently - bullied by officers - at the following cabinet meeting?

    Report this comment

    Sandy.L

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Just to translate Di.ckends sermon, it means that voters pay and have to accept what officers and cllr. deem suitable enough for us to pay for. Pesky elections don't come into it, nor do NCC surveys and consultations. Fact is that certain Cllr. and some other eight individuals took it upon them to ignore their ownb survey, fail to act on their own 2006 recommendation, failed to allow councillors scrutiny or debate of options, fail to assess and plan for our needs to reduce landfill in Norfolk and fail to choose the most economical and value for money options. But the biggest failure of all is their personalities and believe that they are the chosen one's who know best. Voters still expect democatic discourse, how ever hard it might be to understand by those power freaks who had a free reign during the last ten years. I hope that the new executive will look very hard at NPlaw and HR for a start, both their practises have brought NCC into serious disrepute.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Sunday, March 23, 2014

  • The meeting on 7 April would never have been necessary had the officers painted a full, comprehensive and accurate picture for the members at the meeting on 28 October last. We elect members to make decisions on our behalf. Those decisions must be informed ones, if democracy is to prevail. Without all material information being furnished in an understandable form, they will never be.

    Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

  • Hands up all those councillors who have their own opinions. That would be the independents, the greens, UKIP, John Dobson and Tim East. The rest of them do as they are told. Lily livered nobodies. Are they going to be whipped yet again?

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Thursday, March 20, 2014

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

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Partly Cloudy

Partly Cloudy

max temp: 7°C

min temp: 5°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT