Norfolk incinerator inquiry sparks criticism from both sides

The site at Saddlebow where the incinerator was proposed. Picture: Ian Burt. The site at Saddlebow where the incinerator was proposed. Picture: Ian Burt.

Tuesday, April 15, 2014
10:44 AM

Norfolk’s ill-fated incinerator is to be the subject of an inquiry, as the leader of the county council conceded there were still questions over the saga which needed answers.

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

While the man who will conduct the probe has warned he is prepared to “ruffle a few feathers”, the inquiry has been criticised as not being truly independent – by opponents and supporters of the burner.

The former council leader who led the authority when the contract for the incinerator was awarded, Derrick Murphy, has already said he will play no role in the inquiry – because he does not see the man charged with conducting it as “impartial”.

Norfolk County Council voted last week, by 48 votes to 30, to terminate the contract with Cory Wheelabrator for the plant at Saddlebow.

The axing of the contract for the £610m plant – and the compensation the council will have to pay Cory Wheelabrator – means taxpayers will have paid £35m.

At a meeting of the council’s controlling Labour/Liberal Democrat cabinet yesterday, council leader George Nobbs revealed he had asked for an inquiry.

The inquiry will be conducted by the council’s independent chairman of the standards board, Stephen Revell, a former Liberal Democrat councillor and one-time joint leader at County Hall.

It will look at three issues:

How and why the council got into the situation in the first place;

How and why the council reached the decision to terminate;

What the effect was of outside political involvement in helping or hindering the fulfilment of the contract.

Mr Nobbs said: “As we well know there have been many calls for a public inquiry. It is not in my power to order one, as that is a matter for the prime minister. If he did so, that would take months or years and cost millions, but that is a matter for him.

“But I do accept the public is entitled to further answers about the whole process. This has resulted in a bill of £30m taxpayers will have to pay.”

He said the inquiry would focus on the political process and Mr Revell would report back to the council’s head of paid services.

Mr Revell, a former Liberal Democrat group leader of the council, said: “I’m well aware what a divisive issue this has been for Norfolk and I hope I can have a constructive role to play in getting to the bottom of how the decision to proceed was arrived at. If I need to ruffle a few feathers along the way, so be it.”

But the nature and scope of the inquiry has been criticised by those who fought to stop the incinerator – and those involved in the decision-making process.

Richard Burton, an environmental consultant who has long opposed the incinerator, said: “To carry any credibility the inquiry needs to be fully independent. We need somebody who is independent, not connected to the council at all, and has the necessary expertise in the subject areas.”

And Derrick Murphy, former leader of the then Conservative-controlled council and a member of the cabinet which agreed to award the incinerator contract, said: “I do not regard Mr Revell as impartial and will play no role in this inquiry. I want a proper independent inquiry conducted by people with a legal background with no links to Norfolk County Council.”

But his successor as Conservative group leader took a different tack. Bill Borrett, who was also on the cabinet when the decision to award the contract was taken, said of the inquiry: “I think anything that helps increase understanding must be a good thing.

“I believe everything was done by the book and I’m sure the inquiry will say that. If it helps reassure people, I think it’s a good idea. If they want to talk to me I will make myself available.”

But Tim East, Liberal Democrat for Costessey and long-standing opponent of incineration: “This inquiry is the cheap option rather than a root and branch investigation into what really went wrong.

“The brief isn’t wide enough and it should be completely independent of County Hall. Whatever the outcome of this internal inquiry it will be perceived as a whitewash by the public.”

Yet Richard Bearman, leader of the Green Party group at County Hall, said: “I’m pleased that the Green call for an inquiry, made at the April 7 full council, has resulted in the inquiry into who, what and when decisions were made about the ill-fated incinerator contract.”

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

76 comments

  • Rest you all. Such a shame that despite all the fight things may move forward. Blessed are the meek - however one must render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Right Reverend Fuller

    Monday, April 21, 2014

  • Is it delusion or delirius tremens that drive you from one obscure rationale's to another dear Dic.kens? You think that twice refused makes for third time lucky do you? After all this disaster you supported, all the people that were turned irate, the 40% that, thanks god,have woken up and left the Conservatives in Norfolk, that all of that is good news do you? And hail to the power of Norfolks people, I drink to they, three cheers and another bottle of golden ale to toast to more jobs, better and less polluting technologies and reinstating of landfill sites with a decrease in landfill charges. Dinosaurs have to die out. And you are right, Canaryboy knows how to use his head, whilst youre desperate hopes are for a Fata Morgana.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Saturday, April 19, 2014

  • That's a lovely old tune - have you tried KLFM? The reality is, as usual, incredibly different from the future you are trying to paint but you just can't help yourself, can you? Democrat tried to give you a few pointers a couple of months ago but you are so arrogant that you completely missed them. My guess is that you went very quiet for a few days after the EGM because you were tripping over yourself to try and get the inside track from your last remaining pal in an effort to try and regain some face. Well,I have news for you too.... but I'm not going to share it. Stick to your usual riddles - the email you sent bleating to various councillors under a false name last week shows more about the panic you truly felt than you'd ever care to let on here. Pip pip and thanks again. As you say - Checkmate. Just not in the way you think - go back to read my previous post and try again old chum.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Friday, April 18, 2014

  • Own goal scorer Fens.cr.ap is still barking up the wrong tree and biting the hand that fed it. Barking being the operative word. The clown prince of the anti campaigners was closer after a big enough hint about a certain club but as usual stumbled over its own feet and tripped into another pile of soap suds. All that effort on NCC wasted when all the while the target sat behind them quietly turning. One contract does not a project make. The banks are in line, the site is bought and paid for, NCC have given their blessing, the Inquiry is over and all the meetings are done and the local politicians have successfully ducked the flak and squeezed the campaigners dry in the process. Some even made political capital out of it. Just one last thing and then the cement will be delivered and new contracts will be explored by the same people at greater cost. Did you all really think it was all over ? You are not so sure now are you ? Politics is a very dirty business and you were played like a fiddle. You have nowhere to campaign any longer. They made a tactical retreat from one battle in order to win the war. You have been out manoeuvred. Checkmate.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Friday, April 18, 2014

  • A new contract with Cory looms after planning consent already. Others to follow. Good business practice. Shame NCC will have to pay extra though.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Solomon Cohen

    Friday, April 18, 2014

  • You'll excuse me if I continue to take everything you say with a very large pinch of salt D.icky, given that you rolled out the same rubbish about 'being in the know' months ago. You were put squarely on your backside a couple of weeks ago and you'll suffer the same foolish fate again shortly. Don't say I didn't warn you at the time. Thanks again for all your help - Honest John and I were toasting you all night!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Friday, April 18, 2014

  • D.ickens, you’ve never seen anything coming old pal, you’re full of pretence and scored more own goals than everyone else put together. Dominos isn’t the game for you anyway, you have to be able to anticipate the next move, best stick to the word search. Funnily enough I'm sure I saw Fenscape out last week drinking champagne, way ahead of you old pal, way ahead.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, April 18, 2014

  • You have absolutely no idea what is coming D, and you never have.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Friday, April 18, 2014

  • Poor old D.icky - the best friend the anti campaign ever had. No wonder he's so angry - that bottle of Dom he kept bragging about turned out to be warm Tizer. That place with your mates on the management board was never going to materialise, was it? I'd hock those ruby slippers if I were you as they don't seem to be working - you're still stuck in Oz aren't you?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • Own goal scorer Fens.cr.ap does it once again. The campaign clown trips over his own shoes and gets another bucket of soapy water down the trousers. He needs to look on the back of that postage stamp where all his other information is kept. Most people seem to know what is around the corner except the campaigners. No change there.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • "Big shock for the anti mob on it's way". Really? You've been saying the same thing every week for the last year under all your different usernames. I'd give that crystal ball a good wipe as it's getting it's info from a very ill-informed source.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • Big shock for the anti mob on its way. Why is it they are always last to know about anything ? You have to laugh at them especially as they think they have won something. Can't wait to re post the silly comments they have made. Pride before a fall they say.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • F.T. Why would Co.ry Whe.elabraor want to pay 30 million for the site which is worth very little. NCC paid 1.8 million in 2008 when land costs were much higher than they are today. Co.ry Whe.elabrator did not have 30 million up front and will have to justify every penny they claim from the public purse, they will not have money to throw around to make you happy, in fact looks like, from various hedge fund reports, that Co.ry Envir.onmentals outlook is so negative they will be lucky to retain the current businesses they operate. Whether Whe.elabrator would try to push ahead alone somewhere in Norfolk remains to be seen however one thing is for sure Waste Man.agement Inc - their parent company -will not be paying a penny over market price for anything. They are here for one reason only to make massive profit at the expense of UK taxpayers.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • It is the duty of NCC to recoupe as much of the £30 million as possible. The most obvious (pending a thumbs up from Pickles) is to offer the site to Cory Wheelbrator for the equivalent of £30 million, perhaps Cory agreeing to process 20k tonnes of Norfolk rubbish per year free of charge for the next 25 years.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fly Tipper

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • PS, I am registered to receive auto notification of any changes to the many companies I monitor so receive new docs constantly.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • Will do Fen. D obviously you are not in the swing of the regulatory requirements of companies registered in the UK as all those in the anti camp are. Read and learn! Once a year companies submit annual accounts to companies house also every change to a company be it credit risk, director change, change to mortgage, etc has to be notified. These reports are all available and one of my tasks has been to download all pertinent reports, you will know there are many arms to both the willows power and recycling group, the viking consortium and Cory Environmental groups, which I then forward to all interested people. I of course also watch every company associated with the project such as Norse Group, the Green Investment alleged bank, morgan sindal, bam nuttal, c and a superbikes, harry reed & co blah, blah, blah. It was interesting that in Feb last year when the inquiry started viking consortium holdings announced a new company secretary, Sophie catherine jane Reed. Anyway you get the picture the antis have been watching private company books from 2010 onwards as they were registered. I know you like to pretend we are all illinformed but once again you are telling porkie pies.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Thursday, April 17, 2014

  • PS - Canary Boy - do you want to tell D.icky about how one goes about looking at the books and accounts of a private company or shall we just treat him as the mushroom he really is, regardless of whether he logs in as Jim, John, Pugh or Uncle Tom Cobley and all? lol.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Nice to hear Radio Norfolk giving dear old Dekker Murphy a bit of oxygen yesterday - did anyone else notice how he kept talking in the present tense when describing his involvement in Norfolk politics despite having to step down over a year ago for his part in the Kevingate affair? I'm not surprised that he's giving the investigation a wide berth considering that it's his name on the dotted line along with his mate Borrett. I wonder what he has to hide, given that he's decided that he's not going to play ball?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Poor old D.icky - still banging the drum under all those user names both here and on the LN site too. How funny. PFI credits all gone. 25 year guarantee of Norfolk's black bin waste all gone. Customers for all that heat and power all gone. Banking support all gone. Democratic support through our local councillors all gone. The spin from chief officers who have since departed for pastures new, all gone. Patience from the vast majority of Norfolk residents all gone. Projected profit for Wheelabrators American shareholders all gone. One by one the supports have been knocked away and, regardless of what Pickles decides, all hope of building the incinerator has all gone too. Bon voyage old chum - hope you've got your armbands on as it's all sinking around you.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Democrat. You may have scared ikens away as he has turned up like a bad penny in the Lynn News.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Interpol

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • D, I now really have no idea why you are still posting. You are contributing nothing to this forum (inquiry) and clearly are trying to personally gain something. It`s over. Mind you, there are some interesting cases from history that could never accept failure, even though failure it clearly was. We`ve all moved on, but for some reason you haven`t. I could say more about this but .....

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I think the point Hack makes is that you can look at the amount of compensation paid by NCC but you cannot inspect the books of the company it pays it to. NCC are finished with this now and the incinerator project is in private hands. Their books, meetings, accounts and affairs are entirely private from this point on. Not a good situation if one is a campaigner. That is the point it seems.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    John Fisher

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I do wish that Canary would stop pretending (along with his other names) that he has some inside knowledge when he plainly has none as we have seen from years of rants. It seems a shame that the campaign has come to nothing but they tried their best. Just was not good enough. No shame in that.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Pugh Bickley

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Hack are you saying that NCC will not be paying a private company, CW, any compensation from the public purse? Any payment made from the public purse is open to public scrutiny regardless of the payee; perhaps you should ask Timmins to explain the proceedure.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Wymondham boy

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I understand the Ukip leader has been sought to intervene but he will not be available until after he has organised the D-Day landings.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Peter Watson

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Well well. All that talk about it being over and the press making headlines about the end and after all the hype it is only the end of a single contract. Is that it ? Was that all it was? Hardly worth the effort of several years campaigning was it if they are going ahead with the building of the incinerator in any case ? Just a big waste of time and money and who picks up the bill for all this ? Me and the rest of the tax payers in Norfolk. All thanks to those campaigners. Cheers and thanks for nothing. Time wasters.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Richard The Third

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Troll whatever! Keep you a spouting your fibs and utter rot while we sit and wait patiently for the next twist to be announced.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • You can look at County Hall at their accounts but this is now a private venture with no contract with the council. You cannot demand to look at the accounts of a private company. Everyone knows that.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Jim Hacker

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I looked at the accounts last year, so did others who were not happy with how our money is being chucked about. The council announce when the external auditor opens up the books you let them know what you want to inspect and go to county hall to look at whatever interests you. The company paid has no say at all because the council are spending our money, not theirs, I thought everyone knew that.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Wymondham boy

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Of course the main argument of the campaign centered around the council itself and those who worked on a contract. Now the campaign has nowhere to go and campaign. It seems they have shut themselves out and that the councillors walked them right into it. This is big business on a global scale and has far reaching contacts. I think the site will be developed as planned and this was just a good way of clearing a campaign out of the way so the council could get some peace. It seems to have worked.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Hugh Rubbitard

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • There are quite a few threads popping up claiming that the Planning Inspector has advised an approval for the site to be developed. If so what's going to stop them building on the site anyway? If they can get other contracts then there is everything to play for. Any inquiry had better wait a bit.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Mrs Willingale

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • As a tax payer I would like to know this. If the council have chucked in their contract with this firm but this firm is still going to build an incinerator what was the point. It has just cost us all £35 million. For what? To please a few nimby's?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    George Peters

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Democrat is sounding increasingly like Dickens. Both claim to have inside knowledge and speak in riddles. I'll say to democrat what I said to Dickens: if you've got something to say, just say it, and stop playing silly b_ggers.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Sugarbeet

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I see demo makes what he thinks is a smart comment. One thing is clear. As soon as the campaigners realise that it is far from finished the old insults start to fly again. These ruffians never change do they ?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Percy Cuted

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Ignorance shinning through again D! NCC have all accounts audited once a year by the external auditor Ernst and Young, you know the well respected auditors who incidently stopped auditing Cory Wheelabrator companies mid contract last year. Any member of the public can ask the external auditor for access to all documentation for any payment made by NCC it is a legal requirement which CW have no control over. It is our money you know therefore we can indeed demand access to relevant documents and if access is refused the information commissioner, who is already familiar with the incinerator having already forced disclosure of various documents from defra, will be informed and asked to interviene! Can you really know so little or are you just trying to frighten members of the public who do not know local government law?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Do you know I never gave it a thought but of course all that has happened is a contract to use the plant has been cancelled. It does not mean it will not be built. What were those campaigners jumping about for? Why the big celebrations? Talk about jumping the gun.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Magwitch

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • D, the only thing you are correct about is that this is not over yet. Watch and learn. Assuming you have the capacity to do so, of course.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I can't believe that the campaigners never saw this one coming. They seem to have thought that the council was the be all and end all and threw all their energies into that. All that happened is that the councillors have dodged the bullets and they can lay the blame entirely on the anti campaign whatever happens now. Priceless.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Stanley T

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I am afraid it is true. Just because a single contract with one partner has been terminated that has no bearing on the commercial build. It is highly unlikely that the company involved will step aside as there are so many others willing to enter into a contract when the plant is built. A solution to waste is needed now and this is the only answer on the table that is this far advanced.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Jack Bantoft

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • People like Canary will not be allowed to 'demand' anything from a private company. This matter is in the private sector now. The incinerator will indeed be built. It has been a twelve year plan. The council have given their consent and bought the land and that land will be used as it has passed every test. They are not needed any more.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Up The Lefties

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • So the incinerator could rise from the ashes, now that will be amazing. If it is true that demand for rubbish exceeds supply then of course it will fail commercially. Of course it won't fail, it will be swamped by Norfolk's growing waste problem.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fly Tipper

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Di.ckens the money NCC will have to pay is compensation for proven expenses and proven losses! People like me will demand to inspect all invoices, claims, remittance advices etc when NCC accounts are opened up for public inspection by the external auditor in July and August. All payments will have to be fully doumented it is false to imply that CW can simply gain 30 plus million to invest in another project and again proves how little you understand. Also remember an estimated 8 million is for hedging costs payable to the banks putting up the loans again a fully documented cost.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Oh. I noticed the word 'troll' wheeled out again by the anti campaigners. For those who do not understand it means anyone who does not agree with them who dares to make a comment. They liked it when they alone made back slap comments all day long to each other and are upset a few others have the odd kick at the ball. A sad bunch.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Webbed Feet

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I feel I must comment. Some odd thinking here. This firm is about to gain a whopping payday from the tax payer thanks to the campaigners. Tens of millions in fact. Plus they are far from in debt and are a respected multi national conglomerate. As soon as planning consent is granted they will have a queue from those wanting to use the plant. NCC - and thus the local Norfolk residents will have to pay a lot more that is all. Do get the facts right at least. I think they call it a hollow victory and the campaigners have been led by the nose.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Webbed Feet

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Di.ckens you have absolutely no idea of what is going on behind the scenes all you are managing to do is build yourself up to look even more fo.olish when the next twist in the tale is made public. For those not in the know Cory are in massive debt and struggling to get funding to continue their current opertions. Cory and Wheelabrator only had 20 million between them in shareholders cash to spend the rest of the building capital 140 million ish was coming from various banks at high interest. There is no way CW will now build their incinerator at Saddlebow. The desperate attempt by the insigficant troll to cause unrest shows just how far he lags behind those he likes to insult. Democrat I do hope the next twist is announced sooner rather than later so the troll is silenced again and we see more rats leaving the sinking ship.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • I do admire the way the local councillors escaped and the whole thing it still remains on track. Brilliant move that one.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Mr A. Schicklgruber

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Can't see the PM wanting an inquiry into some small back of beyond issue like this. There are other important matters to deal with. The carrot crunchers will have to be satisfied with a local look into things until the build gets under way. Shame they went to all this trouble for nothing. They have had the rug pulled it seems.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Mr A. Schicklgruber

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Wow! That flushed you out. You seem to have a self-esteem issue.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Oh dear Not a Nimby either lacks fingers or has too many and is unable to work out the blindingly simple arithmetic that CW wont be able to build a barbeque in Norfolk. And I see Dickens is back spouting his particularly hilarious brand of rubbish. You must be so pleased Fenscape. There was always the fear that the men with butterfly nets had found him.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    alecto

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Most important is that CW will make more profit now NCC are out the door. Even more reason to press ahead. The campaigners missed that bit as well it seems. Can't go running to the council anymore because they are nothing to do with it now. Just saying.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Not A Nimby

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Also the word is that the Inspector said that consent should be granted. If that is taken then permission to build will be given (on planning grounds). Nothing to do with the council. Just in case the campaigners missed that bit.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Not A Nimby

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Only the council contract is finished with. The site is still going to be used for an incinerator though. Did the campaigners miss that bit ? Looks like it.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Not A Nimby

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • For those that seem to have missed the point it is only a contract with the council that has been scrapped not the project itself. Anyone who thinks this is not going ahead is deluding themselves. You can't blame anyone at NCC now. It's nothing to do with them anymore. Nice move by the councillors.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Not A Nimby

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Suffice it to say, D, you will never know what actually took place. I did give you more than a hint some time ago but you didn`t seem to be able to work it out. You still can`t, and that is really quite funny. Keep up the good work ingo. Keep on delving. This `black issue` needs to be investigated. They will try and block you at every turn.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Deluded; adj: Believing things that are not real or true; "The project will be granted consent and will go ahead".

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    LynnLegend

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Own goal scorer Fens.cr.ap stumbles over the grassy knoll and taps another one in the net with ease. The campaign clown has still not worked it out and thinks it is all over. Not so. NCC decided to move away from blame, nothing more, but they remain committed. The project will be granted consent and will go ahead. Try campaigning against the developers. Good luck. Dirty business politics.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Watch out everyone the grass is here.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • After my last contribution was censored I try again. Ex Con. councillor Murphy is right in one point, the senior management review should be reinstated, why was it shelved by G Nobbs and Ms Gibson? Such a review should make it mandatory for freemasons to come out of their all male closet, and this should apply to cllr.s and officers alike. How can they make decisions when their loyalties lie with single gender affairs, in secret?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • Following on your comments about lorry movements Tony Bromley, ex Cabinet member Alison "I don't do obeying but I expect everyone else to fall in line" Thomas was mad keen to have those lorry movements around Kings Lynn. Boy was she squawking when she thought the lorries could be heading through her division on the way to Suffolk. Would she have agreed to the entire technology on her doorstep? Would she heck as like. Hypocrites, all of them.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    alecto

    Wednesday, April 16, 2014

  • To return to the topic, the appointment of the ex-Liberal Democrat leader to carry out this investigation is nothing but a time-wasting, cynical political manoeuvre by Labour and their Liberal Democrat allies. Any "findings" will not be worth the paper they will be written on. If the intention was serious, and not simply to stage a party political stunt, someone with forensic experience and a track record of impartiality would have been appointed.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Old Hand

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Fenscape, no producer of waste today - be it municipal waste or commercialindustrial waste - would sign up to pay fixed fees at the level CW would need to charge for more than a month at a time. There are so many cheaper alternatives, and flexibility of choice is vital.. (Oh sorry, I forget NCC but it has at last changed its mind.) This is why such a project would be unfundable. And if - mirabile dictu - CW had £165m of its own money, it simply would never be advised to invest it in such a disastrously unwise development. There are too many scaremongers posting here.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    John Martin

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Some people would not have bothered objecting to the incinerator if long as the conditions were perfect. Not so at Kings Lynn as air quality is poor due to traffic pollution, an extra 60000 lorry movements per year and most plants with chimneys are situated upwind of the town. It was interesting on Radio Norfolk this morning when Nick Conrad invited the public to speak. It was bizarre Derrick Murphy playing Mr Nice Guy. A chap called Bernie who cannot see a problem with incinerators but had blown a fuse last year when the Northern Distributor road was planned to be developed near his house.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    tonybromley1951

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Thank you Nemesis for pointing this out in plain English - we still have at least one mischief maker on here that will say otherwise until the cows come home because facts have never been his strong point. More please!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Could I just try to inject a note of commercial common sense into the minds of those who think that, if Eric Pickles does grant planning permission, the incinerator will still be built with NCC simply selling the site on to CW. The construction cost is now estimated at £165m. Even before that, CW were having to raise 80% of the cost from external banks, and that took some pretty complicated negotiations which were only concluded on the back of a cast iron guarantee that NCC would sign up for twenty five years to supply the incinerator and pay for the service. Without such a guarantee, no banks will fund what is otherwise a purely speculative deal. And at the moment, the Cory arm has been trying to arrange a £280m refinancing deal just to stay in operation. This really is pie in the sky. And it would mean political suicide for the political group in County Hall that agreed such a sale.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Still bleeping on about a bad idea that has been rejected twice, loser? I shall raise my umptieth glass of golden ale to that. But this is about Stephen Revell who is too close to do this paint job, not about the 1960's and some failed. Although I can't stand Murphy's politics I fully agree that only a senior management review, scrapped by GNobbs and Ms Gibson, can weed out those who don't give much care with NCC contracts. Apart from that lets look at Gas plasma treatements.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Still bleeping on about a bad idea that has been rejected twice, loser? I shall raise my umptieth glass of golden ale to that. But this is about Stephen Revell who is too close to do this paint job, not about the 1960's and some failed. Although I can't stand Murphy's politics I fully agree that only a senior management review, scrapped by GNobbs and Ms Gibson, can weed out those who don't give much care with NCC contracts. Apart from that lets look at Gas plasma treatements.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • No Inquiry. All over. No more politics already. Private commercial project now.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Solomon Cohen

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Another Inquiry already so soon ? A few old chums having a well rehearsed natter under the old pals act does not quite cut the mustard does it ? Nice try. Should keep the anti crew quiet whilst the planning consent floats in. They can argue at the Inquiry whilst the real work goes on somewhere else. As usual.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Solomon Cohen

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • No proper Inquiry of course. After consent is granted and the site is purchased from the Council the build can begin. The money raised from the anti campaign by virtue of what must now be paid to the developers by the tax payer towards the build is the cruellest irony.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Politicians do not want any responsibility from this and decided it might be better to dodge the blame hence the unusual route of a ‘new‘ vote. The developers will use the tax payers money, courtesy of the campaigners, to begin the project. Very welcome too. In campaigning against it the campaigners have instead funded it. Talk about an own goal. Planning consent by the local authority is a given plus it has all the bank funding and a site has been allocated and purchased. The site can and will be sold to the developers who will develop the it as before without a contract with the council. There will be no shortage of those who will want to use it either. The final nail sits in a dossier which already contains a certain Planning Inspectors recommendation to grant consent.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Dickens

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • No Inquiries old bean. We can't have the lower classes calling the shots. This one will be carpeted. As the incinerator is still going ahead without the politics they can't make too much fuss.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Sir Montague Baden-Philips

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • It should be conducted in a proper manner and if there is any doubt they should all be charged and tried in a court of law. Assets and bank accounts should also be looked at as I don't trust any of them, past or present.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • The financial advice from auditors should be legally contested as they failed to advise officers on the riskiness of this type of planning application and contract, and the need to keep reserves in case of failure..Officers who have left and gave advice were party to the contract signing and it would be interesting to check their indemnity against legal action too, as well as some serving Officers. The only end will be if the Conservative Councillors who were in power on the Cabinet from 2008 to 2013 and are still Councillors accept responsibility and resign.Can the investigation make them do so?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    bedoomed

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Dare I say I agree with Murphy, for once, perhaps he should blow the whistle and tell us more, who knows he may even regain some credibility by doing so! NCC is not fit for purpose and will never be until an external body looks critically at the incinerator debarcle from 2004 onwards and reports on exactly how Norfolk has found itself committed to such a high risk project which at the end of the day has been no more than a paper exercise. Not a sod of earth turned just endless reams of paperwork-desk studies-resulting in a £30-35 million liability to the public purse on termination for planning failure which is what in a nut shell has happened. Cory Wheelabrator failed to get planning consent within contracted time scales. Considering that Corys Belvedere incinerator took 12 years to gain planning permission all those agreeing to a contract with such a narrow window to gain relevant permissions are accountable, including Murphy, for the debt we are now saddled with. While officers agreed the contract Murphy and his political friends made sure it sailed through council so, while there is no doubt more to the tale than meets the eye, no conservative member in office 2010-2013 supporting the project can say they are blameless. Mr Revell is not a fit person to investigate this matter it needs an independent investigation by a le.gal professional, with the tenacity of Margaret Hodge MP, to get to the bottom of the case and ensure that controls are put into place to make sure the same can never happen again. Any investigator needs to consider the evidence oppenents have gathered from FOI requests showing correspondence between NCC officers, Defra officials and EA officials. Those correspndence files show exactly what was happening if anyone really wants to get to the bottom of the saga.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • Mr Revell is not been paid and will only get expenses - even these will add to the taxpayers bill. GNobbs you are wasting money again!!! This is an exercise in futility. Can we have grown-up thinking please? No one will accept the verdict as the onus lies with Mr Revell and he will be restricted to the minimal amount of co-operation from one department in particular - the legal department who will cloak everything under the confidentiality clause and is probably the one department which knows all the answers!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    maryjane

    Tuesday, April 15, 2014

  • I fear that Mr Revell, however well intentioned, suffers from a lack of relevant experience and a perception of bias. Furthermore, his remit is too narrow. Should his report ever appear, it will satisfy no-one.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Nemesis

    Tuesday, April 15, 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: 17°C

min temp: 10°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT