New correspondence reveals “risks” of Norfolk incinerator project

The site at Saddlebow, where the incinerator was due to be built. Picture: Ian Burt. The site at Saddlebow, where the incinerator was due to be built. Picture: Ian Burt.

Monday, July 7, 2014
5:18 PM

Newly-released documents have revealed how government officials feared Norfolk County Council officers were “overly optimistic” over the timetable for the aborted King’s Lynn incinerator securing planning permission.

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

The plug was pulled on the £600m burner at Saddlebow in April following a vote by councillors, after county council officers said the project no longer offered value for money.

That left the council with a £35m bill, including compensation to Cory Wheelabrator, the company which would have built the plant.

The council had awarded itself planning permission for the plant in June 2012 but secretary of state Eric Pickles ‘called in’ the decision, sparking a public inquiry.

The council had been told that it would be told in January this year whether the secretary of state would rubber-stamp that permission, but the date came and went with no decision made.

That led to council officers saying the delay meant the plant, which the government had withdrawn waste credits for, no longer offered value for money, so the scheme was scrapped.

But correspondence between the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and County Hall officers has revealed how the government had long-standing concerns over the potential for such a delay.

A two-page planning report drawn up by Defra was released by the council today. Among the “risks” it had highlighted were the poll by West Norfolk Council, in which more than 65,000 people said they did not want the burner.

The report stated; “Having regard to the volume of opposition that has so far been expressed, the authority’s confidence that the planning application will still be approved by February 2012 could prove to be misguided.”

The officials also stated: “As far as potential “call-in” by the Secretary of State is concerned, this again is not expected by the authority which has provided copy of a letter from the Minister for Decentralisation which states that the Secretary of State ‘is very sensitive about calling in applications and will only do so if they raise issues of national importance and those issues need to be decided by him rather than the local planning authority’.

“This may indeed prove to be the case, but the recent case experience of the Nottinghamshire call-in suggests that this is a risk that should still perhaps be countenanced.”

As it turned out, the plan was called in, which was a key factor in the delay which led to the plug being pulled on the contract.

The issues around the burner were discussed at a public accounts committee meeting last month and, following that, council leader George Nobbs ordered other correspondence be released.

Among them were letters which showed that in September 2011. Defra official John Burns wrote to then Norfolk County Council chief executive David White to raise “risks” of getting planning permission.

Mr White, along with then council leader Derrick Murphy were away when the letter was received, but Mike Jackson, the director of environment, transport and planning replied.

In his letter, Mr Jackson, who has since left Norfolk County Council, said: “Whilst we do not share the same assessment of the future prospects for the planning process I can confirm that the decision to award a contract was based on a thorough understanding and examination of the contractual implications of using standard contract provisions approved by Defra and the Treasury for breakage in relation to planning.

“Despite our more positive analysis I can provide you further reassurance that the authority has taken action to mitigate the concerns that you raise.

“As a consequence the draft Credit Agreement has been modified to ensure that, were there an unexpected delay to achieving a satisfactory planning permission beyond the planning long stop date of June 2013, then this would not constitute an event of default should the authority request that a revised project plan be provided.

“It should be recognised that this would therefore mitigate the risk of significant cost being incurred to bring in a new funding package should this unexpected scenario arise.”

The actions of councillors during the incinerator saga are currently being investigated by former council leader Stephen Revell and the documents will form part of his probe.

But a separate report by Jonathan Acton Davis QC had stated: “I can find nothing to lead me to conclude that any undue risk was taken. I can identify no areas in which I can see potential scope for the holding to account of officers.

• What do you think of the incinerator saga? Write, giving full contact details, to Letters Editor, Prospect House, Rouen Road, Norwich NR1 1RE.

91 comments

  • His behaviour wouldn't be acceptable in any sort of face to face situation - why do you think he spends so much time hiding behind so many usernames on here instead?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • I as a reasonable, respectable person cannot believe that our elected representatives constantly l.ie, mislead and pl.ot against the will of the people of Norfolk. Thousands of individuals objected via the council consultation and with direct letters to government. The old tory regime at county is broken and while I agree Mu.rphy is still pulling Gnobbs strings there are now many real cllrs in office for the right reasons who will not bow down to him. I would be ashamed to have friends such as you D and I would be ashamed to behave as you do.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • Long had his chance along with Dobbo at the last meeting under the old system but he backed off after being told to. The contract has gone but the project rolls on and true enough a new contract will be made and probably part of it will be a deal to offset some losses. Councillors are all in it together and rarely say what they mean. The campaign did its best and they thought it was all over because they were looking at just one aspect which was a mistake. There are always several kettles on the boil and it is usually the one you take your eyes off that whistles when you least expect it. Celebrations were a bit early. Just an opinion nothing else so spare me the usual volley of insults and weasel comments from the campaigners please if that is at all possible.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    The-Blue-Flag

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • Inactive Account, shame your Labour friends didn’t take account of the letter from Ann Gibson about the site and using it in any deal with CW, some things we already know make such comments pretty sil.ly. As for the underly.ing im.plication about Toby, nice try, but that really is clutc.hing at straws, even knowledge about his future plans would tell you there’s not a cat’s chance of that.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Honest John

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • D you are wrong and you know it ,what a very sil.ly thing to say, the new committee is exactly that. You did not comment on Cllr Tim East, whats the matter dont you know who he is?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • The newly formed Norfolk Waste Policy Committee is the old one revamped. A more apt name would be the Waste Committee.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Mad Dog

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • Alex is out of friends, Brian has taken the King's shilling (as usual) and Toby has been.......advised should we say. About as good as three chocolate tea pots.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Diss 'N' Dat

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • Fen even worse than Toby at the helm, from Ds point of view, is that dear Brian Long and the excellent Alex Kemp are on the newly formed norfolk waste policy committee along with the king of Norfolks anti incinerator drive Tim East. No mass burn inconerator will be built to deal with our waste end of story.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • PS - 'Inactive account' - there wont be any sort of deal with CW now that Toby is in charge - you must be utterly seething about that, lol!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • I wasn't banned - some nutter got access to an account under the same name so I set up a new one instead - EDP mods check out the IP addresses on this whole thread if you don't believe me - wake up, Peter Raven, you'll be able to check the entire section here for the wierdo who is posting under at least 20 different usernames because they have an axe to grind with the councillors from KLWNBC....

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Monday, July 14, 2014

  • NCC had to pick Cory Wheelabrator as the preferred bidder, the worst waste company with a long history pollution violations. It was obvious the public would scrutinise Cory Wheelabrator and inform NCC they do not want any dealings this company. From the start It was on the cards the planning application was going to be called in due to hardly any support from the public. The planning application was a shambles and had to be deferred for months because Cory Wheelabrator had submitted wrong information. I do not understand why NCC signed away £20 million of tax payers money when warnings were given that things were not kosher.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    NCIS

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • Correct inactive account about submitting new plan. Acute shortage of feedstock since new EU legislation on recycling glass and plastics. NCC have invested in an incinerator purchased from Argos at £19.99. Ash will be removed from site every two weeks in a black wheelie bin.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Knee deep In Toxic ash

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • Keep those fibs a coming D you just prove your ign.orance time and time again.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • Almost forgot. Part of the new deal will involve letting the council off from a good chunk of the bill they owe. Just saying. Didn't come from me.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Inactive Account

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • I read something from Labour about the site being developed. There was a bit of argy bargy but they reckon it's out of their hands now. The consent to build is a given and a new contract is being talked about.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Inactive Account

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • More fibs D? Fen 2 is not ba.nned at all why do you say such sil.ly things? You must accept that cw will never build a mass burn incinerator in west norfolk.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • I am really fed up to the back teeth with D! Obviously Fen 2 has not been banned so yet another porkie pie!! It is totally pointless to comment on this platform any further for 2 reasons. A- the incinerator will never be built and B - the edp are allowing someone to impersonate other posters thus making the whole thing a farse. I suggest sane posters stop putting up comments and leave D and his pretend friends to talk to themselves. There will never be a mass burn incinerator in west norfolk. End of story.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • Phew, you're really pulling out all the stops to cry wolf on this one, aren't you? Another 4 'people', all from the same IP address - spooky! Why would anyone need more than 1 username on a forum unless they have their own agenda?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Sunday, July 13, 2014

  • I like a good argument but when it comes to requests to ban people because they disagree with those who are campaigning against something then good judgement has become clouded by mob anger and frustration. It was the same in the wild west when they hung strangers or anyone who did not fit in. That same mentality appears to be alive and well in Norfolk.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Lyn from Lynn

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • Fen 2 there is only one person here that needs to learn to behave like an adult and that is you. Do give it a rest and button it. We are all entitled to a view not just you.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Magwitch

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • I don't understand the suggestion as to why someone who makes quite reasonable and often enlightening comments on here should be 'investigated' or 'banned' by the EDP. For what exactly ? I am pleased someone is giving us all the heads up in advance.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Sherlock

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • Recently banned own goal scorer Fens.cr.ap 2 slips over in the foam suds and gets another bucket stuck on his foot. The campaign clown just keeps coming and lining up for those custard pies. Step up pal I have a stack ready and waiting.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • The anti mob seem rattled a usual. Off with their usual boring emails and complaints letters no doubt. They seem to think they can throw insults, abuse and rude comments and use all sorts of tactics as we see below but fail to see it in themselves and then moan if they get the same treatment in return. Odd little lot aren't they ?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Brain

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • You don't ever give true facts. All you do is distort them and attempt to lead people down blind alleys by using a myriad of abusive usernames. You've been rumbled - I hope the EDP are now investigating your shenanigans as this has nothing to do with you having the right to free speech and everything to do with you talking down to people for your own ends. Your IP needs blocking until you can learn to behave like an adult.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • There are pro and anti incinerator groups on here and both are political. Some like myself are only interested in giving the facts and do not belong to either side.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • D. I have never been and never will be - pro - incinerator cant speak for the others you tar with that brush but I would think they will be equally uncomfortable with that accu.sation.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • Very funny - is that not the finest example of the pot trying to paint the kettle black? Myself and other posters have always put forward well reasoned arguments based on fact whereas you have just abused the comments section using a wide range of aliases to misinform and alarm. I stand by my comment below and you have chosen not to disagree with it - the mods should check the IP addresses of all the posts on here and ban the person behind all the mischief, namely you D.ick.ens. 'Outrageous behaviour' indeed.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • Note to EDP moderators - Fenscape 2, Canary Boy, Interpol, democrat, nemesis, alecto and the rest of the small pro incinerator group are using this forum for political ends and are doing all they can to stop any other comment appearing except their own point of view. They will stop at nothing hence their constant pestering of EDP staff and moderators and impersonations of other users. They should all be permanently blocked for this outrageous behaviour.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • The new waste sub committee is highly unlikely to recommend incineration in a new waste policy, given who is on it. Nor can incineration be given the pretence of financial justification now there is no government bung available. I think it is safe to say that Pickles decision is irrelevant; other than the fact that passing it would vaporise at least two Conservative seats in next year's elections. P.S. I expect Canary and Fen are the sort that use modern, energy efficient, 10W LED light bulbs; so that would be extremely bright.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Kadmos

    Saturday, July 12, 2014

  • Note to EDP moderators - you're being taken for idiots - please check the contributor IP addresses for the following users: Stanley, Del Boy, Arthur, Jack, George, Percy, Steady, Barrington, etc etc. £10 says that they are all the same person - do you need to sort this yourselves or will an email to Hustler sort it once and for all?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • I love the way the two sad ones are pretending they read Private Eye. The Beano more likely.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Stanley T

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Not sure why someone has come on pretending to be Di.ck.ens. Another fight started the anti's can't win it seems. Ha ha. Canary and Fen sound as bright as two 10 watt bulbs. Birds of a feather as they say.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Must admit I missed the eye this week have been away staying at Corse Lawn House in gloucestershire- home of the Hine family - would you email me a copy please?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • You've hit the nail on the head Canary Boy - you just can't help some people. I doubt he's read this week's Private Eye either....

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Ps forget the over rated dom I have already broken open the Hine rare and delicate!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Its probably because he now realises that NCC off.icers, ncc me.mbers, district council reps and the new anglia ente.rprise part.nership had a meeting this week with kl.win to try to plan the way forward for de.aling with Norfolks waste without ma.ss burn incin.eration. Poor old D was not only ex.cluded but he obviously didnt read last weeks LN and was not aware of the meeting this week arranged by Andy Wood C.E.O of Adnams. Poor old D, m.d, b.d and very, very s.d.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • It is probably because he now realises that NCC off.icers, ncc members, district council reps and the new anglia enterprise partnership had a meeting this week with klwin to try to plan the way forward for dealing with Norfolks waste without ma.ss burn incineration. Poor old D was not only exc.luded but he obviously didnt read last weeks LN and was totally unaware of the meeting courtesey of Andy Wood CEO Adnams. Poor old D, m.d, b.d and very, very s.d.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • He's been well and truly rumbled Canary Boy - for someone who is so sure of the facts he seems to be more rattled than usual. I wonder why? Maybe he should crack open that bottle of Dom he keeps prattling about and have an early night with one of Derrick's books?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Hi Fen 2, good to see the genuine you on this comment string for a change. Hard to understand why the Edp can allow duplicate user names, you would think they would reject a second account using the same name but hey hoo just goes to show what a mickey mouse it system they use! It is best to totally ignore the idiot at the end of the day he has lost not only his fight but also the plot bless him. My dad always said dont mock the afflicted and with that in mind best leave him to mutter away aimlessly to himself in his dark corner. He has lost the plot as well as his mass burn incinerator and any credibility he ever may have appeared, for a short while, to have.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Heshe does not seem half as sad as one loser I could mention.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Arthur Pewty

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Posting as democrat and ingo too? Bit sad really - one can see how frustrated you must be what with always being on the losing side of an argument. Poor you.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Oh dear D.ick.ens, someone seems to have taken a dislike to you. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows the post below isn't by me so pack it in old chap. Tut tut.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • Jack. The electoral commission sanctioned the referendum and said there were no irregularities. The problem was Cory Wheelabrator had violations for fraud and polluting and assume this was the reason for refusing to take part in the legal referendum. The week before NCC signed the contract Cory Wheelabrator were fined $7.5 million for pollution.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    LynBin

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • I think it has been widely documented that the so named 'poll' illegally conducted by Lynn Council was a fiddle and was in breach of the rules laid down by the Electoral Commission. Hence it being completely disregarded by officials.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Jack Bantoft

    Friday, July 11, 2014

  • I know for a fact the anti-incinerator campaigners had posted some leaflets close to the Kings Lynn area. NCC and Cory Wheelabrator bombarded every house in west Norfolk on many occasions with tons of literature and at every opportunity were had a captive audiance on BBC Radio Norfolk. County councillors promoting the short version of the planning application for the incinerator at most Parish Councils in Norfolk. KLWNBC had conducted a legal referendum and checked by the electoral commission and secured 65516 92% convincing NO votes. Cory Wheelabrator refused to take part but went alone with a engineered poll and canvassed customers at Waitrose Swaffham before being escorted off site by the manager. The planning application was embarrassing for CW and NCC as very few wrote in to support the burner. Gets worse at the public inquiry had less than a handful of supporters but none had submitted any technical evidence concerning the proposed Kings Lynn site. One supporter talked about CW plant at Belvedere but this is different technology location and irrelevant to the planning application.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Interpol

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • You hit the nail on the head Steady On. Just a few nimbys have created the impression they have huge support which is untrue. We have seen that when just a handful of them turn up at any event. They have to drag family members along to swell the ranks and even then it's only a dozen or so. The whole campaign is a farce and the only voice of truth on here seems to be the real Di.ck.ens and not the pretend one. I think we all have to admit that much.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    George Peters

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • Steady on. In this instance your point falls down. John Martin is from Broadland, Alecto and Ingo have stated often enough they are from South Norfolk, I live around 6 miles away, HJ and the real Fenscape - not the poster on this comments string - can comment on their location if they want to but none of our house prices would have been affected. However, the health and wellbeing of those living in the poor district, mostly local authority accommodation, of South Lynn, plus Saddlebow, St Germans, North Runcton and West Winch most definitely would have been, had the incinerator been built. I suppose the value of private homes in South Lynn, Saddlebow, St Germans, North Runcton and West Winch would have been blighted but that was not the reason objections were lodged, via NCC or at the inquiry, by those I know who hail from those areas. I have been very pleased with the most recent developments which reassure me that a mass burn incinerator will never blight the lives of people in West Norfolk. You may have noticed all the news recently of massive investment around Lynn, that would not have happened had the incinerator gone ahead. How could you have developed the old town as a tourist attraction with the incinerator spewing out its poisons in dominant view of the area.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • Sources close to local Labour are indicating that there has been a strong hint that the project will gain support from Central Government.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Percy Cuted

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • How much of the motivation of people that oppose these developments (roads, schools, anything basically) is motivated through genuinely trying to do the best thing and how much is motivated by self preservation and greed, usually related to personal house prices.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Steady On

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • The post below isn`t from me of course. Again, it`s a little disturbing that a certain person on here feels so powerless that he needs to do this.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • Is there any form of development going on in Norfolk that isn't being blocked by old, retired toffs that have nothing better to do? Bet they wouldn't block a waitrose being built. Tourists.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Steady On

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • Interesting Derrick Murphy suggested he was not fully supportive of the incinerator after he stood down as county Councillor and Leader. I suspect Defra got wind of this and wondered why he had a change of heart and meltdown of the Tory party in Norfolk after kevingate. This confirmed the public were dissatisfied with the last administration in turn shows no consensus for an incinerator in Norfolk.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    wattonlad

    Thursday, July 10, 2014

  • You might or might know something D, but I know that the incinerator will not be built and I also know why. I always assume that politicians are lying so that the truth is a bonus. Told you all this ages ago but you could not believe it. The post from Fenscape is not from him of course. We now know for certain who is impersonating him. Sad really.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Wednesday, July 9, 2014

  • I see the campaigners are still shooting at the messenger. How very 'local'.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dr Barrington-Smythe

    Wednesday, July 9, 2014

  • I see Maryjane is playing to the audience as usual trying to say something to gain a brownie point from the anti mob. Sad person. Stick to what you know love whatever that is.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Wednesday, July 9, 2014

  • Ah, 28th July. I have an appointment to see my dentist.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • Cor listen to old H. John. Takes one to know one. If there is anyone on here who sounds like something found under a donkeys tail it has to be him. Priceless.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Richard The Third

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • Dishonest John does remind me so of that flying elephant in that Disney film. Can’t work anything out for himself and when someone gives him all the answers he wanders off believing he worked it all out himself. In that case he will already know what will be taking place on the 28th July wont he ? Perhaps the other campaigners should give him a call and ask him. Don’t hold your breath. Who on earth is Mark Davidson by the way ? Another dodgy anti campaign nom de plume no doubt. Give it up already.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Solomon Cohen

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • HJ surprised the supporter of CW hasnt made any mention of the meeting this week at Adnams. You would expect him to be boasting of what the outcome will be and how his CW friends will receive even more money from the public purse via agreements for future projects.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • Dickens, I'm still waiting!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • D.ik.ens talking the usual rubbish again.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    maryjane

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • Yes, Fifi knows everything. She must be taking the gap soon. Then we will know the game is up for the Council. As for a readers' committee John, excellent idea. And may I suggest you are Chairman because if there is one steadfast truth running through all of this, is your devotion to the people of Norfolk and their need to know the truth. It was your letters to the EDP that caught my attention and turned me into a campaigner, not just against the incinerator but because of the total lack of democracy the Tory party and the officers on the Council showed.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    alecto

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • As said Stephen Revell will be furnished with all the relevant information that he needs on a need to know basis. That which is in the public domain will be thoroughly scrutinised and the findings of his examination of that already divulged information will be made public. Obviously he cannot be given anything governmental that is covered by secrecy rulings or confidential files or that which is held in confidence as that would transgress the law that surrounds such matters and that is quite in order and within the remit of government to suppress. He will not be privy to several files that may have been lost or otherwise destroyed. Those files would not have contained anything that would influence Mr Revell or lead him to conclude adversely either way and their loss would therefore be of no significance.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • And Dickens, why did Derrick Murphy think he could persuade the Communities Secretary not to call in the planning application at a time when it hadn't even been lodged with NCC?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • Oh, and I have one further question to ask the EDP. Why is it so selective about the articles on which we are allowed to comment and those on which we are not? Of late, for instance, it has wanted no comments on anything to do with Stephen Bett. Perhaps Archant should set up a readers' consultative committee to advise it - or would that be asking too much?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    John Martin

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • Yesterday, I posted what I considered to be a polite and constructive response to Dickens' original comment. It has never appeared. There seems to be no rhyme or reason to which comments make it into print and which do not. And if your comment does not, the resulting insult is an automatic e-mail three days later telling you that it was rejected "For the following reason: Other". I sometimes wonder why any of us bother.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    John Martin

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • One person who has heard it all,given advice and no doubt collaborated with all and sundry over this - namely fifi- perhaps she should be asked to go before a PAC-quickly before she resigns!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    maryjane

    Tuesday, July 8, 2014

  • @ schicklgruber...assuming Re.vell gets all the information. I wonder how our beloved leader Nobbs is feeling....

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Scooby

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Dickens, who were the officers that decided exactly which documents JAD should see? Do tell.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • "The plug was pulled on the £600m burner at Saddlebow in April following a vote by councillors, after county council officers said the project no longer offered value for money."...........Well as far as I know the project is still going forward. No 'plug' has been pulled. A single contract was cancelled that is all. £600 million projects do not get scrapped because a few weak kneed councillors bail out. They are only a few local old boys who know very little about any of it anyway. No one takes much notice of them.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Stephen Revell is a very safe pair of hands and a wise appointment. You can rest assured that his investigation into all aspects will be thorough and will make for some interesting reading. I love a good yarn.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Mr A. Schicklgruber

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Scooby, those who cant be trusted appointed Mr Revell.However I dont think they realised just how much evidence would be sent to him. They didnt take into consideration the NAO or PAC inves.tigation either. I hope Mr Revell will actually compile an honest report so we can begin to rebuild trust in NCC although in a way it is irrelevant because external agencies are scruti.nising them now and those who were negli.gent, incom.petent or possibly cor.rupt will be exp.osed.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Scooby, those who cant be trusted appointed Mr Revell.However I dont think they realised just how much evidence would be sent to him. They didnt take into consideration the NAO or PAC investigation either. I hope Mr Revell will actually compile an honest report so we can begin to rebuild trust in NCC although in a way it is irrelevant because external agencies are scrutinising them now and those who were negligent, incompetent or possibly cor.rupt will be exposed.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Jackson, Murphy and White still have a lot to answer for. Remind me, why did White resign and how much was he paid? Is this the same authority that said it was perfectly ok to put money in Icelandic banks because they relied on rules rather than the obvious? The same authority that is now saying it relied on 'standard terms of contract' when common sense might indicate otherwise? Jobsworths!!!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    andy

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • I note that D..ens did not say that the letters had been passed to the QC! Indeed he seems to imply that the investigation was designed to show a verdict that the Council wanted. Of course he did complete the task to the best of his knowledge but that in no way means he had all the information.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    andy

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • @canary boy...agree with all your comments....who appointed Revell...???!!!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Scooby

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Dickens, which NCC officers decided what JAD should see?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Scooby cover ups within NCC are par for the course luckily some of us managed to interest the public accounts committee who in turn asked the national audit office to report to them on the back of the inspectors inquiry report. You will note that Defra, the NAO and the public accounts committee are not covering NCCs backs. If Mr Revell seeks to continue the covering renegade officers and members with the very large whitewash brush as per norm trust will never be restored in our local authority.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • @Di$$ens....always one step behind....

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Scooby

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • 'Despite our more positive analysis I can provide you further reassurance that the authority has taken action to mitigate the concerns that you raise'......they certainly did that.....!...time for legal action..

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Scooby

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • There should be a full investigation and charges should be bought against all concerned, that includes the current administration who could of stopped it earlier. Crooks the lots of them.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • @Dickens. I think in Sir Humphrey-speak, it means "no, he didn't have all the information"

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Anglianjacky

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • surely a 'cover up'....

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Scooby

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • something smells fishy...looks like Davis didnt get all the information....@Di$$ens, THIS is the issue

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Scooby

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • I read with interest that the Incinerator contract was formulated using "standard contract provisions". I think that it is reasonable to suggest, that such contract conditions are at the very least "contractor favourable"! A breakdown of the final penalty sum and especially that portion going to the contractor is the least us ratepayers should be provided with.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    john lillburn

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • @Dick%%s...of course Acton Davis acted to the best of his knowledge and ability. The issue is he wasn't informed of all the facts.....but presumably told he was by the Officers....this whole debacle is beginning to smell rather bad...I wonder if there is any case for legal action against those who appear to have been less than forthcoming with ALL the facts...

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Scooby

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • The multiple poster using sexcist and derogatory names and terms in the past, Dickens, finally had to apologise for using this blog as a playing field for his offensive mouth. This has not stpopped him making false claims and the wishfull thinking is still his only modus operandi.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Dickens, can you give us all a reliable assurance that Jonathan Acton Davis QC was shown the exchange of letters and the Defra report? (At the moment, I have a FOIA request in for that information.) You may also want to bear in mind that, while Mr Acton Davis QC is undoubtedly an extremely eminent QC, his recognised fields of expertise do not include planning law and practice. No doubt he is as able as the next QC to interpret and apply planning law, but our planning system also hinges very much on ministerial practice and policy. I would respectfully suggest that he is not experienced in that context. To my mind that is why he apparently took the view that NCC should not necessarily have anticipated a call-in, and the consequences such an event would have. The Defra report suggest that this is where NCC went horribly wrong - hence the reference to the Nottinghamshire call-in, which should have been uppermost in the minds of NCC officers in particular. From your position of lofty advantage, can you tell us why it clearly wasn't?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    John Martin

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • Jonathan Acton Davis QC was given all the relevant information needed at the time of his involvement and was informed of what he was required to know pertinent to the matter in hand on a need to know basis. It therefore follows that Acton Davis was in full knowledge of all the information he needed to complete the task before him and that he did so to the best of his knowledge and ability.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • The bill left for us mugs to pay works out over £40 a household.Thank you very much, Norfolk Conservative Party.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Peter Watson

    Monday, July 7, 2014

  • It is far from clear to me that Jonathan Acton Davis QC was ever shown the exchange of letters and the report to which Dan refers. Perhaps someone in County Hall would care to enlighten us.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    John Martin

    Monday, July 7, 2014

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

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Overcast

Overcast

max temp: 14°C

min temp: 11°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT