Poll: Should Norfolk County Council scrap plans for the King’s Lynn incinerator

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

Saturday, October 26, 2013
9:40 AM

The long-running saga over a controversial waste incinerator proposed for King’s Lynn will be debated by the full council at Norfolk County Council on Monday.

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

Councillors will vote on a recommendation to put to the controlling cabinet over whether to approve a revised project plan for the plant - or whether to reject it.

Rejecting it would break the contract and would trigger compensation, with council officers warning that will have grave repercussions and could lead to further service cuts.

But what do you think? The EDP wants to hear your views on the matter.

Following the withdrawal of government waste credits, county councillors will debate on whether to continue with the project on Monday.

Breaking the contract would mean that the council would have to pay £25.9m compensation to Cory Wheelabrator, and then money would have to be spent procuring an alternative.

PriceWaterhouseCoopers, however, have put the potential bill even higher - up to £100m, although they concede they did not have access to the full information.

Have your say by commenting at the bottom of this story or by voting on our incinerator poll.

EDP reporters across Norfolk will this weekend be asking residents whether they think the incinerator plans should be scrapped. The results of the snap-shot poll will be printed in the EDP on Monday.

167 comments

  • Mad Dog, please explain were you live and how these 700 jobs compare to the possible 3500 jobs created with recycling. If yopu live anywhere nearby the plant, you also failed to be kind and appreciative of the increased HGV traffic and extra traffic in that bottleneck of Norfolk.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Please let democracy rule and these councillors have to listen to the people who live in the area; it will be political suicide, not to, for many of them.

    Report this comment

    John L Norton

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Sorry I should have added - allegedly - in front of face bankruptcy. Only NCC and their PR machine want that incomprehensible old tosh bandied about If NCC truly cannot find between 26-28 million they should be calling in the auditors! External ones of course!!!!

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I cannot understand why people harp on about not being able to find restricted information about NNC policy planning or finance. Just been reading a letter from Jeffrey Read ex shop keeper Downham Market who was at the public inquiry. His letter to the LN was published on the 19th of June. The title was “Response to my many critics” He explained “One council insider confided to me” Typical that as a member of the public you write to NCC for information and receive a negative non committal stock letter reply. I advise anybody to side track county hall and go to top man Jeffrey Reed ex shop keeper!

    Report this comment

    Emma Miller

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • First we had THE LADY IS FOR BURNING, a memorable (and forgettable) front page which resulted in numerous complaints to the PCC. Now we have "New report claims Norfolk incinerator compensation could be more than £100m" (Thursday October 24 2013), another example of the EDP (Dan 'razor dodger' Grimmer) playing fast-and-loose with the reported facts for the sake of a sensationalist headline... But has Mr Pickover finally lost his nerve in his race to the bottom to convert the EDP into a red-top tabloid? "A14 toll a matter of principle says Clegg" (p4, Saturday October 26, 2013). "... Clegg told the EDP he was not going to 'deviate'..." An open goal, crying out for a front page banner headline "I AM NOT A DEVIANT, RAGES CLEGG!". Why not? Frit? I wait with bated breath, and sick bag, for Monday's and Tuesday's front pages...

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Come on everyone. You know who is posting under various aliases again. He has dropped his dirty names but nevertheless continues to talk rubbish. No pun intended.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I also read about the 700 jobs this new facility will create and it is a very good thing for this area. Let us all hope it goes ahead and this silly nonsense against it stops.

    Report this comment

    Mad Dog

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Surely Sherlock its you and the backroom dealers, who hide away here under pseudonyms, who do not like the 65.000 poll in the vicintiy of the plant, voters, many of them Conservatives, who said NO to it, nor do you understand all those who said NO to a Costessy plant, equally badly sited in the main wind direction, with both proposals emitting 180.000 tons of polluted and badly filtered emissions on to either Norwich or Kings Lynn. What about Norfolk voters mandate do you not understand? do you think 9 people signing this contracted, most expensive plant, with no debate, is good enough for us plebs, is it?

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Alecto, you do us a disservice. It's 40 jobs that are predicted. And they will not be reserved for Norfolk residents.

    Report this comment

    Kenny Bunkport

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • How George Nobbs handles the situation tomorrow can have devastating effect on the Labour party in Norfolk. George was known as the Rottweiler at county hall but Tories have renamed him the poodle. For those people old enough to remember rouge union activists in the work place, the bosses would promote them to charge-hand with increase in wages and benefits. I hope George has not fallen into the same trap and forgotten his values by rubbing shoulders with members of the NCC TORY CORY Wheelabrator Club.

    Report this comment

    CleanAirPlease

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • I also agree that this should be allowed to go ahead. I have no idea what all the fuss is about. The council want to build something to deal with all the waste we produce. They want to burn it instead of bury it which is a much better idea and needs all our support. I vote NO to scrapping this because it is good for Norfolk.

    Report this comment

    The-Blue-Flag

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Lyn from Lynn has arrived so this is just yet another Cory Wheelabrator backed dodgy poll. Will you be sitting in the public gallery Monday and will dear old John be with you?

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Looking through all these comments from both sides it is obvious that the majority think it should be stopped, the people can see through the council and they should take this on board. The council needs to remember these people put them where they are today and they will finish them tomorrow so to speak, they need to do the right thing before Eric Pickles does it for them. Put it to bed once and for all.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Capri: why muddy the waters by bringing the NDR into these exchanges? And on a point of punctuation, this article is a question, this poll is a question, so why isn't there one of these? ?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I assume the interim finance chief has prepared a full breakdown of the £230 million reserves with full details of what each pound is reserved for. I also assume he has prepared a statement to explain why no reserve was allocated for the incinerator. One thing is for sure, if they vote to go ahead, the council will no longer be able to blame the previous administration, it will all be down to them.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • hope the editorial is long...in case I run out of loo paper...

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Why do you refuse to upload my comment. It mentions no names and is not liable but still after 4 attempts you refuse to add it to the comments section. EDP isotally biased in whose comments they are allowing.

    Report this comment

    Sandy.L

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • The only poll that should be questioned is the one that took place in West Norfolk- the geographical distance from the site of those polled , the postal nature of the vote and the puzzlingly high rate of response relative to the number of people over the age of 18 in the area.

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I hope they go ahead and vote to accept and get building. Lynn needs this.

    Report this comment

    Not A Nimby

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Some people rely on the media to keep them informed but has more benefits imaginable. One of the pro-brigade with multiple silly usernames was on about savings of £8 million per year. I sat down at my PC and scrutinised the figures and they did not add up. I ended up using the same formula as NCC and CW to calculate the true reasonable result but had trouble obtaining a fag packet. Went to my local shop and told the shopkeeper what I needed the cigarette packet for. He handed over a 40 year packet of Senior Service as they are calibrated to council specification. It ended up the county would lose £10 million per year by having an incinerator, I doubled checked by going back to the shop and purchased a pack of Woodbines but still had the same results. I posted this information on the original fag packets to DEFRA and they immediately stopped the PFI credits. Sounds bizarre but NCC calculated there would be a £100 million exit fee to cancel the contract. Now that is ridiculous, I expect they used a Beer Mat.

    Report this comment

    wattonlad

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • £600 million of taxpayers money for 40 jobs on a shift pattern, 20 people by day and 20 people by night all shipped in from America. Working in a big white elephant in Norfolk. I don't think so somehow. Waste of taxpayers money if you ask me. Who signed this contract? Time to get out when you can.

    Report this comment

    Jack

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Err, why does the EDP finally want our views now? They have been ignoring the people of Norfolk in favour of listening to every single bit of rubbish spouted by the County Council (including this) from day one. What has changed? Is it the fact that everyone is being given the runaround including the accountants and the lawyers and the penny has finally dropped with the EDP that the people of Norfolk have been taken for the most almighty ride and the EDP have helped every step of the way?

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • CB, NCCs lack of openness has paid dividends for Cory Wheelabrator shareholders. The reason for the meeting on Monday was to put the house in order and have the full council debate that should have been prior to signing contracts. The whole planning process was engineered to rush through the incinerator by the last administration. It is now impossible to have the debate because the previous administration had broken planning rules and makes the incinerator application in my opinion null and void. To favour a company with violations for fraud and pollution NCC should have made sure CW was scrutinised to the hilt. NCC openly encouraged interference with a legal Borough Council election to discredit Nick Daubney who was a thorn in their side. This incident (kevingate) was by the top man ex-leader, also in the middle of the incinerator planning application and was enough evidence showing excessive manipulation. This is illegal no matter what any scrutiny committee say. If you turned the tables and the ex-leader had asked one of his colleagues to send an email to the media to discredit a CW board member, they would take action and seek $millions in compensation.

    Report this comment

    Interpol

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Percy Cuted ? Time you went to bed John....your head will explode if you keep this up. Still at least you have confirmed what an utter farce a few trolls can make of any subject on here.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • I'm not surprised to find the anti camp have been cheating with these polls. Shows them for what they are. They are always using hundreds of different names and now they are using them to swindle this poll. And they talk about fair play ? Bunch of jokers.

    Report this comment

    Inactive account

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • blue tractor

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I want to know why the finance director and cllrs setting the ncc budget 2013-14 judged when allocating our money that termination due to planning failure was unlikely!!! From autumn 2011 the planning application was either undergoing Judicial review applications or was subject to a call in by pickles. What bright sparks decided not to safeguard Norfolk by earmarking 26-28 million from the usable reserve so that in the event of planning failure Norfolk would not face bankruptcy? Whoever considered departmental budgets, step forward Mike Jackson presumably, was well aware of the planning longstop date of 10 June 2013 was well aware of the inquiry and knew that Pickles would not have made his planning decision by then. Yet more evidence that decision makers at county are negligent with the public purse and not up to their jobs.

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Well I have heard that this plant will create at least 700 new jobs plus another 1,300 connected to it. Direct employment in an area that needs jobs. If this building can give employment to 2,000 people around here then it gets my vote every time.

    Report this comment

    Up The Lefties

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • My understanding was that a vote was carried out by the people most concerned. All were against this contract, even councils. So why bother EDP with a meaning less exercise. The only winners in this disgusting shambles are the would be builders of the plant. For some reason, best known to the shiny bottomed taxpayer employed , civil service who have generously arranged that millions be paid in compensation for not building a plant. This is the real question . Who drew up this contract and allowed such a ridiculous situation. A faceless, nameless jobsworth. No doubt since disappeared from the scene of the crime.

    Report this comment

    norman hall

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • WHAT !! Multiple voting by the anti campaigners and they have been found out by one of their own boasting about it (Larson Whipsnade). I knew that last Norfolk poll was fixed and now we have the proof by their own admission. No vote on anything is ever that high. What a bunch of crooks those campaigners are. Hope the EDP investigates in time (before the Monday vote) and publishes a good story about it.

    Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • 69 (soixante-neuf) comments so far - of which I have posted 9: Ingo's bunged a few in, Alecto, Dickens, ALEXSKY, bedoomed, Canary Boy, Canary Brain, Bikerboy, Raj, Joy... multiple posters all: lies, damn lies, and statistics

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Can someone please explain, how NCC are going to fund this project now they have lost the £169 million? If they can still go ahead without it, what was the point of it in the first place?

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Daisy Roots - you are entitled to your opinion. The poll in KLWN had a 67% turnout, 92% of whom said NO. Even if all the 'no shows' had voted YES, the NOs would still have carried the day. As for 'alluent yappy move ins', isn't that a county-wide (countrywide?) phenomenon? The EDP's coverage has been abysmal. Just look at thw ay they spun the PWC report!

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I am writing to the new head of finance today to ask him to make sure the 2014-15 budget has 29 million of useable reserves earmarked for termination due to planning failure in it! New planning longstop date will be 10.6.2014 and it is highly likely, in fact almost certain, that at that time consent will have either been refused, no decision announced because Pickles will have to consider new evidence put to him or if consent is given it will be within the statutory ap.peal period. If they fail to earmark money in next years budget we will face, black.mail tactics, of threats of bankrupting Norfolk again. As officers cannot be trusted to safeguard the public purse the public, whose money is being miss managed, must do what they can to ensure NCC act responsibly, as is their duty, and ensure their negligence never leaves the taxpayer in the same situation of, allegedly, being on the verge of bankruptcy.

    Report this comment

    Joy, King's Lynn

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Burning is best for rubbish and waste materials. Hospital waste was always burnt and it was clean way. This will make job for many and be cleaner method.

    Report this comment

    Mr Raj Patel

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • This project must not be scrapped. It will cost over 700 jobs plus all the other local business that will benefit. To scrap this would be madness. Build it I say.

    Report this comment

    Canary Brain

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • John Fisher - it is physically impossible for NCC to increase council tax by more than 2%. Whoever informed you they might triple was factually inaccurate.

    Report this comment

    LynnLegend

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Yes indeed democrat. do you not think it odd that out of all these "it must be built" posts there is only one from a certain person. It is well documented it would only be up to 40 jobs if it were built. They are getting pathetic now saying it's going to create 2000. That's some wage bill.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Welcome to the first Polish post! Agree with you Alexsky.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • There a lot of scaremongering going on, even that red Tory Nobbs is at it. I think they better listen to the public or many of them will not be councillors for too long. If it goes ahead then civil disobedience should be planned.

    Report this comment

    Cuthbert J. Twillie

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Wonder how many readers in the USA and Turcks & Caicos Islands have voted so far?

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • It is about time they got on with this and built it. This is a good opportunity for the region. It will give much needed employment and it will boost the economy. What can't some people see this ? Give it the thumbs up Monday please

    Report this comment

    Inactive account

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Interesting letter in the Edp today pointing out that NCC has existed for 40 years and that for 32 of those years it has been conservative controlled! Then the farce of the incinerator, RAF Coltishall & the road to nowhere came along need I say more?

    Report this comment

    Joy, King's Lynn

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Dissand Dat. No itsd not a Norfolk wide poll and its not representative for anything but EDP readers who might get or read the paper. I have not voted and won't do so on here, never do, but I admit, it speaks to the lazy minds who have not got a clue and rather get on with consuming and discrading all these resources into landfill, now full; then they feel good about choosing the right bin for their waste and, off course, they vote as they always have. Nobody is allowed to burn household waste or get prosecuted, why should it be allowed for rogue's to charge us and then do just that?

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Are we all waiting for the pearls of wisdom to drop from the lips of the editor tomorrow morning in his whole page editorial?

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • "PriceWaterhouseCoopers, however, have put the potential bill even higher - up to £100m, although they concede they did not have access to the full information". No they have not. They have indulged in HIGHLY UNPROFESSIONAL SPECULATION about what CW might go after on entirely different legal grounds which they would have enormous difficulty getting any court to recognise! This is typical scaremongering by the EDP, who have the cheek to write on the 'spider scare' non-story that "Perhaps we should all keep some perspective and not get tangled up in a web of sensationalism.". Amen to that

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Has to be time for the new Finance Director to be sacked if he's unable to report accurate accounts? Isn't false reporting fraudulent?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Monday, October 28, 2013

  • LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE Sunday, October 27, 2013 EDP; “You can vote as many times as you like on their poll....a vote for each different browser you use ....a vote for each troll account.…“ So Larson my son you know how to cheat the system do you and use multiple votes? Now we all know how the anti campaign managed to get the so called 65,000 votes against the campaign. The old tried and tested method of cheating in some way. Thank you for informing the public. I took the liberty of photocopying the page and took a digital imprint just in case your admission is removed from the EDP. Quite an own goal. Are you sure one of your other names is not Fens.cr.ap ?

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • And we all know what the last poll was don't we Dell? It was the COMRES poll, commissioned by CW with questions guaranteed for the result to be in CW's favour. Then there is also the questionnaire they were thrown out of the supermarkets for.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • in view of the EDP's shameful record of pro-CW pro-NCC bias in its 'news management' of this story, does anybody seriously trust the EDP to manage this poll? I suggest a second poll, in the print edition - "do you trust the EDP yes or no on its coverage of the burning issue?" with the results counted and scrutineered by readers!

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Sorry another cut and paste from the same news report from its comments....."Landfill tax isn't £64 per tonne until 1st April 2012. It is on an escalator going up by £8 per year until it reaches £80 per tonne. It also has VAT added to the tax so the gross figure will then be £96 per tonne by April 2014. There will then be a floor under the standard rate at £80 per tonne, so that the rate will not fall below £80 per tonne from April 2014 until at least 2020.".....Has Norfolk County Council got a 5 year projection of how much it will pay in landfill tax if the incinerator isn't built?

    Report this comment

    Rhombus

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Can't wait until Tuesday....then, all this rubbish(sic) will be sorted out. End of one chapter, beginning of another..I wonder who (councillors) will still be around?...

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • It makes perfect sense to build this incinerator. The site is miles away from everyone on an industrial estate. Great place for it and will create hundreds of jobs. No doubt I will now get the usual raft of petty insults from a noisy few who can't get their own way.

    Report this comment

    Arthur Pewty

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • "....Larson Whipsnade admits to voting 50 times ...". Actually i haven't voted at all merely pointing out that all EDP polls are as about as straight as a Zimbabwe election. I would have voted " don't know " but they only have a " not sure " option. It's not a subject i can work up much interest in.

    Report this comment

    LARSON.E. WHIPSNADE

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Oh, and 'Lynn needs this'? Thought it was Norfolks efw? Lynn needs this as much as you need a hole in the head

    Report this comment

    d, west lynn

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Says Norfolk's uber-troll..... must be true then.

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • What a strange thing to do . Organise a vote now. Why? After the EDP leader came out against it then suddenly a nameless reporter gives a one sided argument against it. We are all aware that one person will vote many times because he has many aliases.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • I am very near the site but Lynn is still a long way away from this industrial wasteland. This will be a very good place to build what will become a big business and big employer for Kings Lynn. We need work and jobs. Please vote to keep this project.

    Report this comment

    Lyn from Lynn

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • For heaven's sake Magwitch and all the bozos who think that the council tax can be put up whenever and by how much the Council feels like. Time after time sensible individuals have explained on here how putting up council tax and its limits works. Take it on board for crying out loud. They didn't pick their posts out of a fortune cookie. They are stating the facts. Get that straight. I think some people are beyond redemption. Regrettably I think a large proportion of them are councillors.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Yarmouth outer harbour, another farce, plus procurement gaffs by the Broads Authority, suggest that local authorities and county councils are quite simply not up to the task when it comes to dealing with private companies and contracts. Reminds me of a Brian Rix Whitehall Farce!

    Report this comment

    peter waller

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • At NCC and BCKLWN the same system is in operation. It is also the same system operated by every local and central government. The Councils are run by Officers with many years of experience and they present to the untrained and unskilled ‘Councillors’ numerous highly complex cases that require ratification by vote to comply with democratic policies that have been adopted. The Councillors change like the wind but the Officers remain and tend to know what is what which is why their advice is invaluable. A clueless new Councillor who was voted in a few months ago with no experience whatsoever obviously cannot be allowed to make decisions on multi million pound projects. Prior to the ‘official’ public meeting there are one or two ‘other’ unrecorded meetings. One is the political group meeting where the Councillors are told which way to vote by their leaders and the other meetings are with Cabinet members and Officers who advise them what to do and say. Words and speeches are prepared for the Councillors in advance along with the facts and figures. Following rehearsals the public meeting can then take place and all of those clueless new Councillors can end up sounding as though they know what they are talking about and the vote goes the ‘right way’ so to speak. Hands are raised on cue and those that arranged in advance to abstain go in hiding and those who have agreed to vote the other way to give a balanced appearance are allowed their brief moment. The main vote goes the way it was planned to and business as usual continues. It is the same for each and every major decision. The minor Joe Bloggs stuff is more transparent as it is of no great significance and Councillors are given free reign with these simple things. This gives the general appearance of democracy in action. People may not like it or accept it but it is the way councils and governments are run. Always has been and always will be. So try not to be too hard on the Councillors because they are only a bunch of opinionated well meaning amateurs without a clue who rely on the Officers every day for help. None of you really believed that retired sweet shop owners, farmers, ex double glazing salesmen and butchers wives actually run things……….did you ?

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • For Gods sake...please vote for it and put us all out of our misery!!!

    Report this comment

    MIKEJ

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • John Norton: "Please let democracy rule "! Hef yew bin smokin' Mike Jozefiak's socks? (again)

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • The site is 0.9 miles from the first houses in South Lynn and less then 1.5 miles from the school. 700 jobs, don't make me laugh it is well documented there would only be up to 40 jobs if it were built. Same goes for a council tax increase, it's capped at 1.9%, ask George Nobbs, he confirmed it at the council meeting when councillors asked about increasing it to prevent cutting services to save the £189m. The multiple users or user on here saying otherwise is just doing his usual to try and scare people that it would increase dramatically when there is no way it can unless there is a referendum and the people of Norfolk agree to it.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Wake up and smell the bottom ash children. It was Cory Wheelabrator who said it would produce 40 jobs, not anyone else. I am sure they would have been delighted to have bragged about gazillions of jobs but even they weren't going to stretch credulity that much. That would have been stupidity of the most ridiculous sort. Now go and take your pills, silly people. Continually calling Cory Wheelabrator liars over this subject is not exactly advancing your cause is it? On second thoughts, take two pills.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • John L Norton: "martin wallis, I tried Mike Jozefiak's socks... how about yew". Common as muck. I go for toking on the upper-class Paxman M&S (or is it S&M) Y-fronts with reinforced gusset... strong stuff, Capstan Full Strength. As a token of how seriously I am taking this whole burning issue, and in response to the EDP publishing one of my letters when I thought I'd been banned (again), I've just expedited the following: read it and weep: Next Monday's headline in the EDP "ENTIRE COSMOS BACKS BURNER, SAYS EDP POLL"... 'In a late surge of postal voting from Ursus Minor, the KL burner was given the thumbs up by EDP readers...'. Tuesday's front page: "IT WOZ THE EDP WOT WUNNIT!" '... Norfolk County Council voted decisively (three in favour, 79 unexplained abstentions, two sick notes) to back the burner following a long completely unbiased campaign by your EDP...". Wednesday's banner headline: "BRING BACK MURPHY". '... amid scenes of jubilation unequalled since Gossy shafted Bayern Munich... the citizens of Norfolk thronged the streets in towns and villages far and wide chanting "Who do we want? MURPHY. When to we want him? NOW". In an unexpected turn of events, NCC archivist and Head of Lore 'Kevin' revealed exclusively to the EDP that he had 'seen somewhere' a medieval parchment which opens up the possibility of a radical change of the guard at County Hall: an obscure clause - said 'Kevin' - authorises a 'coup by popular acclaim': three honest and upstanding citizens must set their imprimatur to this deed (Murphy, Borrett and Nobbs fit the bill): all they have to do is swear on a copy of the King James Bible (Michael Gove version, embossed in gold) in Chaucerian English "Because I'm worth it" and the deed is done: all incumbent county councillors will be transported in a Panamanian rust-bucket to Tristan da Cunha where a chap called 'Ashcroft' is awaiting 'minimum wage' labour to build an airstrip. All NCC employees will be relocated to 'England-North-of-the-border' (Scotland) where they will be put to work repairing potholes. County Hall will be restructured to host a casino, a massage parlour, a multi-faith 'I swear to *** I meant no harm' chapel... and a derivatives dealing complex (a facility for dealing in complex derivatives). You heard it here first, in your EDP

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Judging by the last few posters on here, this 'poll'thread is rapidly descending into complete farce...with people commenting on the subject with absolutely no understanding of the wider picture. EDP, please feel free to stop this poll....it is a complete waste of time

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • It's a farce and should be stopped, with the whole process being investigated by an independent body. The Costessey incinerator was rejected and the people of West Norfolk rejected the KL incinerator in a council poll. With EU mandated recycling rates (that the current and previous government agreed to) some simple calculations show there won't be enough rubbish in Norfolk to keep the plant running, which will trigger compensation payments to CW. They will also need to take in rubbish from other councils to avoid the incinerator having to be sitw&restarted (a very expensive process) for which Cowell charge, but none of the money will come back to Norfolk. As for the claims of 70, where? The rubbish will be transported in less of HGVs, which will be driven by current employees of the waste firms around the county, they'll need a minimsl staff to run the plant due to automation, and the construction crews will be temporary and brought in from elsewhere. Like the NDR, it's a vanity project that gives no benefit to the residents of Norfolk and should be abandoned.

    Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Monday, October 28, 2013

  • LARSON E WHIPSNADE said earlier and I quote; "You can vote as many times as you like on their poll....a vote for each different browser you use ....a vote for each troll account....John Norton could vote at least 50 times. " This is disgusting and shows up these campaigners for what they are. I am sending this evidence to the EDP and also to every councillor ahead of Mondays vote. The have a right to know the type they are dealing with.

    Report this comment

    Magwitch

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Can somebody please remind me when the infernal incinerator contract was signed? It seems to have little provision for failure. This smacks of predetermination. Am I right in saying 'Bankrupt', in the context of Local Government, is simply not being able to balance the budget and would put NCC into 'Special Measures'? Westminster would then appoint a team to make all the officers do their jobs properly. What's bad about this scenario?

    Report this comment

    Kadmos

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Canary boy "Very naughty edp ". Damn right. The EDP, and Dan Grimmer in particular, have been spinning this story since day one.

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • ..and when, dear EDP, will you publish the results of this 'poll'...?

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • How many other contracts with compensation clauses are there? What compensation have we had from the Cambridgeshire plant which "has been a catastrophic failure" according to the report to Councillors? Was David Harrison aware of this catastrophe and what has he done about it? The report says we have enough capacity for 4 years in place,so why panic now when an agreed solution could be in place by then?

    Report this comment

    bedoomed

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Planning permissions for this type of project have been high risk for some time.It seems that the financial experts at County Hall ignored this knowledge and viewed the plan failing as low risk,hence no budget figure to cover potential loss of £20 million plus. The bankruptcy threat is needed to stop this happening again,Section 114 gives a 21 day breathing time for Councillors to agree a funding method for the compensation. Use it.

    Report this comment

    bedoomed

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • martin wallis, I tried Mike Jozefiak's socks, but they gave off more toxins than the incinerator is likely to do, according to some. Anyway he has ran out of socks now and moved onto his underpants and even I ain't going to try them, how about yew?

    Report this comment

    John L Norton

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • This ruse by the EDP to make out that they are carrying out a realistic poll is their way to satisfy and register their own minority interest within Norfolk, it is, off course absolutely unrepresentative of Norfolk as a whole. But we did have a consultation on waste in 2000 and over 70% of us decided to reduce, reuse and recycle. The EDP, just as NCC are ignorant to this fact, i.e. our mandate to Cllrs., instead they are trying to big up the worst, most expensive and most polluting option,, still, they are excusing the criminality of a company that has been prosecuted for burning its own polluted filters, indiscriminately spreading the contamination tenfold. The EDP is promoting this kind misleading behaviour by officers and councillors at NCC, but why? The current concept from the 1960's is planned past our needs, landfill reduction has not been considered, nor has there been debate with all options openly visible and explained to councillors. All Norfolk got is the worst, most expensive option signed in a backroom deal. So yes it should be rejected, waste should go on a yearly contract to Holl.and and councillors should start by debating the options in a calm and considered debate over our needs. This must include our 3 million annual expenditure on landfill charges which are avoidable, indeed their contents could be turned in to valuable gas for use in cars, home heating or electricity generation, not to speak of the metal resources and compost.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Something smells very fishy about this whole scenario. How can contracts worth millions be agreed before planning permission was agreed? How can a firm walk away with over 20 million for simply having put some proposal plans together? It seems there was a 'done deal' with CW agreed by those in the NCC cabinet at the time, based on the assumption that permission would eventually be granted. Sooner or later the whole process should be put to a public inquiry, if only to learn how not to do things in the future.

    Report this comment

    Steve Gordon

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Whereas the fact that you're using about 20 different usernames on here to vote in favour is OK then, Mad Dog? Anyone looking down the comment section can spot you quite easily as you spout the same stuff under all of your different aliases..... enjoy your custard pie.

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • It it`s allowed to go ahead then the ruling council group will unravel and we will be left with the Tories again. A number of previously staunch Tory supporters (including an ex leader of a council) don`t want them back in power again, because, as he states "they are destroying the county". He remains a strong Tory supporter nationally. I still believe there is a sting in the tail. Personally I am disgusted with the way Nobbs has behaved so far. Monday will be interesting indeed.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Of course a 'YES' vote on Monday is entirely probable; the true ‘cost’ would crystallise in Cory goes running to a judge following a ‘NO’ and the sordid details of corruption and incompetence by councillors and officers alike were to be finally revealed. £26 mil to keep a lid on that lot is a bargain.

    Report this comment

    Mr Cameron Isaliar

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I doubt it alecto - the current Ed seems to change his mind as often as the wind. At least you knew where you stood with Waters. (And if nothing else, he was always willing to pull out his Gold Visa and treat you to the odd lunch if he wanted to get you on side before reporting back to NCC's PR unit....)

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • This is a far better option than digging holes all over Norfolk and burying our rubbish. Burning is clean and the ash makes good fertile soil. Best solution all round.

    Report this comment

    Arthur Pewty

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Here's a thought. The ransom contract does not trigger the payment if Cory fail to get approval. So NCC should just tell them they have failed and the contract is now null and void. Surely?

    Report this comment

    Richard Woods

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Defra must have felt uncomfortable dealing with the NCC CW alliance and have the same suspicions as the as public. Too many Dodgy emails flowing from councillors to change events by deception is nothing but fraudulent. Tomorrow’s meeting should be to cancel the contract without any compensation package for CW. NCC had not held a full council meeting prior to signing the contract. They did not suspend the planning consultation open to the public while Derrick Murphy was manipulating events with (kevingate).

    Report this comment

    Interpol

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Can we please now have a vote as to whether the County Council should continue to be run by a toxic combination of useless councillors and inadequate employees earning a wage far above that that their ability calls for. How about putting it under special measures for a couple of years and get proper lawyers and accountants to go in and rip the place to shreds then we can find out the extent of the goings on over the last quarter of a century. It must have taken that long for such a outfit to rot in the way that it has.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Joy don't forget NCC involvement in the Outer Harbour fiasco

    Report this comment

    John L Cooper

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Not sure Martin and I have been reading the same EDP-seems to me Daubney and chums have got a pretty good airing in the EDP relative to the views of the council tax payers in the whole of the county who will be footing the bill to make sure the voters in King's Lynn are appeased ( including all the affluent yappy move ins living in the parts of the area polled which are almost at 20 miles distant from Saddlebow.)

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Interesting letter in the Edp today pointing out that NCC has existed for 40 years and that for 32 of those years it has been conservative controlled! Then the farce of the incinerator, RAF Coltishall & the road to nowhere came along need I say more?

    Report this comment

    Joy, King's Lynn

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I think Sherlock made the best point today much earlier down his thread. For those against to constantly be so rude and critical about the views of others is quite pathetic and comes over as desperate. I firmly believe this site should be developed and an incinerator built. I am entitled to that opinion.

    Report this comment

    Percy Cuted

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • BBC News 31 Jan 2012....."Rubbish fines are costing councils millions of pounds"......" the UK government has operated an escalator, raising fines on landfill every year since 1998; from £7 per tonne then, to £64 now."....."Over the past year, Worcestershire County Council has been fined £6 million. That's the same as their budget for their libraries and four times what they have to spend on subsidies for local bus services.".......Sorry for cutting and pasting, but for all the governments 'kindness' in not financing our incinerator, they will not hesitate to fine us heavily for every tonne we landfill over our landfill 'allowance'. Looks like Worcester buried 100,000 tonnes more than their allowance. Was the fine cheaper than sending the waste for incineration?...probably, but with escalating fines and escalating landfill costs, not burning waste will not be an option for Norfolk in a few years time.

    Report this comment

    Rhombus

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • we are in the end game....monday will bring about the beginning of a complete capitulation by the ruling administration at NCC....whichever way the council votes on monday, or the cabinet votes on tuesday, the shouts for the present administration to fall on its sword will be deafening, given their completely disorganised style of leadership, lack of backbone, dwindling support, lack of integrity, extraordinary reliance on a biased press, inconsistent communication strategy, all alluding to the 'not fit for purpose' moniker that fits so well. Thankfully for Norfolk, there are a few who have stuck to their guns, remained resolute to the last, and steadfast in their cause.

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • No apologies for mentioning it again but if this were the other way around the anti brigade would be wearing out their keyboards. Ha ha ha. I can’t believe that Larson E Whip snide - sorry Whipsnade (multi name - I can‘t keep up with them) admits that the campaigners cheat and one of them has voted at least 50 times today to skew the results of this poll. No doubt a swift check would reveal dozens of new names from the same address registered in the last 2 days as well. I hope the paper print a story about the campaigners tactics especially after all of their daily accusations about just about everyone else. Laugh I nearly bought a round.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • The council must not support this. All councillors should reject incineration. Costessy didn't wan't it, King's Lynn don't want it, Norfolk doesn't need it as the government confirmed when they took away the funding.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • This incinerator must be scrapped. We either subscribe to a democracy or a dictatorship. If we believe in democracy this should be scrapped. The business case is so flawed that the suggested penalty clause will be peanuts if it goes ahead and we have to pay for the shortfall in burnable waste. The NHS and Social Care bill hasn't been factored into the economics if it goes ahead, and the mortality and morbidity that would be associated with this incinerator will be high enough to have an impact on already overstretched NHS resources. NCC HQ is far too big for the few remaining staff rattling around it, so I vote we build a new block of offices on the KL site for NCC and build the incinerator on the NCC site. Norwich people will soon bleat about that I warrant!

    Report this comment

    Carborundum

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Gosh, I say, who are the Iiars trying to protect? The council has well over 10 times the suggested compo amount in ‘useable’ reserves, of which relatively little is for statutory duties or contractual obligations, therefore in a time of desperate need there is every justification for plundering them. The interim for financial misinformation could better devote his efforts to that process.

    Report this comment

    Mr Cameron Isaliar

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • SCRAP IT NOW! It will cost £28m to do this on Monday but pass the RPP and it will cost millions more to scrap it later. How can NCC even consider tying taxpayers into such an ill-conceived, out-dated and totally unnecessary project.

    Report this comment

    Sandy.L

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Very naughty edp you know the 100 million figure is only feasable if NCC accept the revised project plan and then terminate the contract. Not only does that statement scaremonger but it is false in the context in which it is presented! Please start serving Norfolk instead of NCC PR.

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Tony.. It’s on the cards Glass and Plastics will be collected in the green bin and starve the burner. The trouble with many councillors is they cannot see further than their expenses.

    Report this comment

    LynBin

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Multi username never ceases to amaze me with their stupidity. What daft claim are they going to come out with next?

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Labour leader at NCC George Nobbs has let Labour down. If councillors vote for the revised plan they will be voting for the big white elephant to be built nearest to point that has the most waste. Norwich would be the ideal position for a waste incinerator. Building it in Norwich would save millions of pounds than carting it to a county at the furthest point is stupid and a waste of taxpayers money. George Nobbs is fooling you all. he may think it will go ahead in King's Lynn but there is no way Eric Pickles would allow wasting taxpayer money carting waste to a county, especially when that county would be recycling all black bin waste. I personally would not like to see it built anywhere in Norfolk recycling is the best option. George Nobbs said use your vote wisely, I certainly will be doing just that at election time and I won't be voting for George Nobbs.

    Report this comment

    Jack

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I am on vacation at you`re beautiful county of Norfolk i have to tell you guys NO incinerators have been built in the USA since 1995. “”They're horribly expensive, and experience shows they do not save money and you still have to dispose of toxic ash. They also produce far more toxic gases that're released into the atmosphere than proponents claim. We have a big one in Onondaga County near Syracuse, New York - and the cursed monstrosity costs tens of thousands of dollars per year to operate. It even started accepting trash from surrounding counties shortly after it was built - and still saves not a single penny””. My brother wrote this peace over 4 years ago.

    Report this comment

    Cindy Mendona

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Councillors. Do not forget your manifesto. We won`t!

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Of course this should get granted permission. I hope the council sees sense and votes in favour of Cory.

    Report this comment

    Webbed Feet

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Gerald - the 'power station' at Palm will not be taking medical, commercial or industrial rubbish in order to keep the fires burning thus the waste product coming out of the flue will not contain the same levels of toxins. It's like comparing umbrellas with custard.

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Monday, October 28, 2013

  • Whats with the moronic claims it doesnt affect anyone? Or it will create 700 jobs? Are you really that simple? It would create a handful of jobs, contractors for construction already have jobs, anyone with an ounce of intelligence can figure that out....

    Report this comment

    d, west lynn

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Stanley T: wake up there at the back: the 65000 who voted against were polled in the KL and WN local authorities: a county-wide poll was not held: and there are 733,445 Norfukkers.

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Joy excellent move. NCC suffers with selective hearing and eyesight when it comes to $£ Cory Wheelabrator. If this was a private company the banks would withhold loans until a proper business plan was approved. The new administration blames the old administration so there is a strong element of distrust especially as Interpol has highlighted involvement (kevingate). I suggest that councillors have been put in an impossible position now the media has influenced events by scaremongering. I cannot see any problems paying CW the £20.5 million but contractors’ were aware of the public inquiry and I expect miss-informed by CW, NCC officers and councillors that the incinerator will be built. I have not seen any projections published by NCC or CW showing increased recycling, shortage of feedstock for incinerators Europe wide and withdrawal of the PFI funding over the next 25 years. This must be in the revised CW plan that will cost Norfolk quite a few £ million more.

    Report this comment

    NCIS

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I have to say that burning rubbish does appear to be a 21st century solution. I know this may upset the beards and people that drink beer with twigs in it but the facts speak for themselves. We need to build this for our futures.

    Report this comment

    The-Blue-Flag

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • @Democrat.....as I said yesterday on this thread, the leadership of NCC is 'not fit for purpose'.....what worries me is the number of councillors that can not see this playing out right in front of them! but instead they have been harried into false sense of doom and gloom by the NCC propaganda machine aka EDP, peddled by the leadership, based on erroneous statements made by senior officers...blind leading the blind. Lets hope St Jude blows some fresh air into the chamber at county hall tomorrow.

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Building this huge plant will produce a lot more work than the anti brigade predict. If we take on one side the pro campaign which says 2,000 jobs and the other extreme on the anti side of 40 jobs we should meet somewhere in the middle at around 1,000 jobs which is the fairest way. The council should therefore build this and prosper.

    Report this comment

    TO55ERLONG

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • It appears to me the legal advice given to the council before approving this incinerator was suspect. Who advised the council to approve this deal. There must be comeback?

    Report this comment

    Michael Clintergate

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • The new Councillors of all denominations had promised the electorate they would stop the burner if they were elected. The previous administration had an unhealthy relationship with Cory Wheelabrator staff. Of course the planning application had to go through smoothly as CW staff would be resident in county hall for the 25 year contract. The PFI funding had been removed for valid reasons and this is an indicator the planning application and contract is suspect. The meeting on Monday should be to discuss why the previous administration had stitched up the residents of Norfolk with a deal any worse than any pyramid sales scam.

    Report this comment

    batemansusan

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • 700 jobs created? Who came up with that idiot figure? It will be a handful, if that.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • We need to vote to have this built here otherwise the council tax will go up. I have heard that the council taxes could triple if we pull out. Forget what others say the truth is taxes will rocket if this does not go ahead. It must be built.

    Report this comment

    John Fisher

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • If the councillors do not do the right thing by the people of Norfolk tomorrow, it will be the end of both the Tory party and the Labour party at County Hall. Personally I have never voted anything but Labour in the past. They have lost my trust as much as the Tories never had it!!

    Report this comment

    Sandy.L

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • The loss of PFI or government money gives councillors a reason to vote to cancel the incinerator. Remember the other major County Council scheme the NDR is only partly funded by the government. Norfolk CC have agreed to cover the shortfall there. Millions involved. Given how tight council budgets for next year will be, where is this NDR money coming from? If Cory are to be compensated will County Hall use that NDR money or have to borrow the amount due and pay the loan back over many years? It is incredible how we have arrived at where we are now!

    Report this comment

    Capri

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • It is very noticeable that when there is a result that anti campaigners like they praise it and when a result appears they do not like they try to pull it to pieces and claim it is the work of one person in disguises who works for Cory or the council or they are being paid. They make the same claims about journalists, newspapers, councillors, government officials and so on. Boy oh boy this must be the worst case of conspiracy theory anyone has ever seen. Do grow up you lot. You got it all wrong and you don't have anything like the support you thought you had. Others have a different view that is all. Deal with it.

    Report this comment

    Sherlock

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • At NCC and King’s Lynn the same system is in operation. It is also the same system operated by every local and central government. The Councils are run by Officers with many years of experience and they present to the untrained and unskilled Councillors numerous highly complex cases that require ratification by vote to comply with democratic policies that have been adopted. The Councillors change like the wind but the Officers remain and tend to know what is what which is why their advice is invaluable. A clueless new Councillor who was voted in a few months ago with no experience whatsoever obviously cannot be allowed to make decisions on multi million pound projects. Prior to the official public meeting there are one or two other unrecorded meetings. One is the political group meeting where the Councillors are told which way to vote by their leaders and the other meetings are with Cabinet members and Officers who advise them what to do and say. Words and speeches are prepared for the Councillors in advance along with the facts and figures. Following rehearsals the public meeting can then take place and all of those clueless new Councillors can end up sounding as though they know what they are talking about and the vote goes the right way so to speak. Hands are raised on cue and those that arranged to abstain go in hiding and those who have agreed to vote the other way to give a balanced appearance are allowed their brief moment. The main vote goes the way it was planned to and business as usual continues. It is the same for each and every major decision. The minor everyday stuff is more transparent as it is of no great significance and Councillors are given free reign with these simple things. This gives the general appearance of democracy in action. People may not like it or accept it but it is the way councils and governments are run. Always has been and always will be. So try not to be too hard on the Councillors because they are only a bunch of opinionated well meaning amateurs who rely on the Officers every day for help. None of you really believed that retired sweet shop owners, farmers, ex double glazing salesmen and butchers wives actually run things - did you ?

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Monday, October 28, 2013

  • The EDP man in the street poll reported today probably got it about right. No matter what it is proposed to do with the rubbish to avoid the ever more expensive landfill a nimby group will surface to oppose the infrastructure necessary. It's just the same with phone masts, we all want coverage, but no masts near us. And all the while the Suffolk incinerator is well on the way, with the waste heat to be used to heat acres of glasshouses to grow food. PS I presume there will be no opposition in Kings Lynn when Palm Paper build their gas fired power plant with its chimney causing similar "health" problems, rather than using power from the incinerator.

    Report this comment

    Gerald Brown

    Monday, October 28, 2013

  • Unhealthy, unnecessary and unwanted.

    Report this comment

    Barking

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • If districts were charged individually for residual waste collected, this would increase recycling. The government was toying with the idea of weighing black bins before they are emptied and charge residents for surplus waste. Not if but when this happens, NCC will defiantly not have enough waste to supply their contractual amount to the burner.

    Report this comment

    tonybromley1951

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • for the record, the print version of the EDP is bought by about 6% of the population (47,000) in the EDP's putative 'circulation area'. So this poll means diddly squat... UNLESS there are about 700,000 good souls in Norfolk, E Cambs and N Suffolk who are regular 'visitors' to this site! How plausible is that? Maybe the EDP (David Powles, Cat Evans, Peter Raven, Oliver Hoff... on the Digital Platform equipe) would be kind enough to post on this web site, NOW, a ballpark figure for the visitors-cum-'hits' which they record (for advertising purposes) on a day-to-day basis? That would be in the interests of TRANSPARENCY. Fat chance.

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • If we face, as -what ever you say officer- Harrison and Norfolk faces Armagedon if clauses in contracts agreed by the officers advising him It is time to contact our MPs and demand the government launch an immediate public inquiry into the competance of our authority. What they have done, if the scaremongering is true, is tantamount to maladministration of public funds. They have knowingly agreed clauses in the knowledge that if the contract was terminated for any reason at all they would bankrupt the people of Norfolks public service provider, and our public purse. How many other proposals carry the same level of risk? This is unexcusable and must be taken outside of county hall.

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Come off it Larson. You have been captured bang to rights mate. You said anti campaigner John Norton voted 50 times and told us all how he did it. You expect people to believe your latest tale ? Don't think so.

    Report this comment

    Percy Cuted

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • This will create 700 jobs so it should go ahead. Good thing for Norfolk.

    Report this comment

    Canary Brain

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • It's an EDP insecure online poll. It's worthless.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Daisy Roots - you are entitled to your opinion. The poll in KLWN had a 67% turnout, 92% of whom said NO. Even if all the 'no shows' had voted YES, the NOs would still have carried the day. As for 'alluent yappy move ins', isn't that a county-wide (countrywide?) phenomenon? The EDP's coverage has been abysmal. Just look at thw ay they spun the PWC report!

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • NCC has never been in this position before where a company has a stranglehold on the county’s finances. This will be extended to more than 25 years if Cabinet decide to support the incinerator tomorrow. It would not surprise me if CW sells their UK incinerator business off as soon as possible to a dodgy American outfit. May be a good idea to change their name similar to Nuclear plant at Cumbria, Windscale to Sellafield. Change the incinerator name from Willows to BurnYourMoney

    Report this comment

    Emma Miller

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Actually LynnLegend, whoever told John Fisher that council taxes would triple is honking bonkers and John Fisher is also completely cracked for believing it. In fact there is a lot of stupidity being spouted on this site. They really do come out of the woodwork when they think they've got to make a point. I assume that most of them are Councillors because their posts show a depth of stupidity and illiteracy that is not found in the wider population.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • So the editor of this paper is going to write a full page editorial for tomorrow's edition. This will come as such a treat to Canary Boy who has often remarked on the EDP's unhealthy attachment to the County Council on the basis that you don't bite the hand that feeds you. Still we may possible get something even handed at the final fence but I'm not taking any bets.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • John Fisher - it is physically impossible for NCC to increase council tax by more than 2%. Whoever informed you they might triple was factually inaccurate.

    Report this comment

    LynnLegend

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • I think the poll is interesting, it appears that the readers do not want it either.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Footyboy have you not been paying attention. The availability of incineration capacity at Amsterdam has been mooted since 2010. The rest of you who seem to think that the incinerator will produce hundreds of jobs please take one of your reality pills with a glass of water. The number of jobs that would be available would be less than 40 and only a small proportion of those for loocals. What on earth is wrong with people? Have they got zips on their ears? My favourite Dope of the Day is the bloke who thinks that a combination of incinerator bottom and top ash would make a good soil treatment. I can only assume that you have managed to find some of this toxic outflow already and have eaten some vegetables grown in it.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • It must go ahead or council taxes will go sky high.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • John unfortunately public money has already been spent on YOH and Mr Timmins will not have any control on that contract. He will be responsible for projects already in planning and should oversee them in a much more responsible manner than those have gone before. You do make a very good point though luckily the inspector for the YOH revision order was on the ball and didn't fall for Eliza's version of need and benefits. Phew!

    Report this comment

    Joy, King's Lynn

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • scrap it....and the NCC Leader should resign immediately as should his cabinet colleagues

    Report this comment

    Scooby

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Denmark values waste as a resource 26 Oct 2013 - Cleantech The Danish Ministry of the Environment launches resource strategy for Denmark. More recycling and less incineration are the main points in the new strategy. The message from the Danish Minister of the Environment, Ida Auken is clear: To perceive waste as a resource that can be recycled, thus making Denmark a waste-free society. In the future, Denmark must incinerate and deposit less waste and become better at utilising the value and resources embedded in it. - We must recycle more and incinerate less. It is my mission to make Denmark a waste-free society that recycles as many materials as possible. That is why we must sort our trash so we can extract the value from the waste. It is good for the environment and it can create new jobs and business opportunities, says Minister of the Environment Ida Auken.

    Report this comment

    Jack

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Well done martin wallis and wattonlad for bringing humour into the debate. Genuine posters with genuine points to make. There is something very distasteful behind this incinerator project, and although I am not against incineration per se, I am not anywhere near being convinced that Murphy et al got the right deal for Norfolk tax payers. DEFRA may well have come to the same conclusion, but of course they have inside information that we the public will never see.

    Report this comment

    Rhombus

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • All those who say burning is the best and cleanest option are ill educated, amplifying wrong information sadly, just as many of our councillors who were not allowed to debate the issue. So are those who say council tax will go up, Mr. Patel, you any good at accountancy? look it up if you can use a computer. Finally, a friend rang me and said he voted three times on the EDP POLL, IT IS RIGGED alright, inconsequential, vote plenty and often they say. The EDP could stop the sexually implicit posters who have the same IP, but its refuses to, encourages such behaviour, it could also run a poll that allows an IP adress only to vote once, they also refuse to that. All those who are venting off here and have not been following the story or issues at hand, are clearly not speaking in the interest of Norfolk or its children and youngsters who need jobs, they are merely speaking for the false name they invented. Recycling and more cleaner cheaper methods will employ 3500 in jobs that are modern and that have a future, whilst the 1960's incinerator will do the opposite, polluting three schools under its plume and decreasing the health of people in East Lynn and beyond. Do I live there? no, I live in South Norfolk, but this is a Norfolk issue.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Why are so many people having a go at the EDP for putting a poll on its website? The results of the vote is not likely to change the opinions of county councillors. However, it is the job of a newspaper to report the big stories of the day and seek people's opinions. Don't shoot the messenger!

    Report this comment

    Alan Edrich

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • The incinerator needs to be scrapped. The non elected and highly paid advisors and the previous Tory led cabinet need to be seriously scrutinised. Somebody needs to be held to account for this awful mess that we the electorate and ratepayers of this once great county, have been saddled with.

    Report this comment

    ZiegfriedWN

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Here we go again: my comments get routinely rejected by the moderator for being a 'duplicate' (or more often for Reason: other - which has a nsty whiff of Big Brother about it!)now my latest comment has been posted twice! Is there anybody at the helm of the Good Ship Archant Digital Platform? I've voted twice so far in this poll... anything to stop me voting umpteen times, is there?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Well well well.....so John Norton voted at least 50 times did he ? Well according to his chum Larson E Whipsnade he did ? He said so on this forum. Now we know the real truth of how the anti brigade operate. Cheating to get the results they want rather than the truth the cannot face.

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • hmmm just had a swift peek at the Most Read Stories list Poll: Should Norfolk County Council scrap plans for the King’s Lynn incinerator is not there

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • There are always two sides to anything and no point in engaging in online hostility. I also think that this will be a good thing to build and it is in the right place at the right time. The councillors would be right to approve measures to continue on Monday.

    Report this comment

    George Peters

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Although it is not representative of Norfolk as a whole (only of people who take the EDP and who read the forums) there is obviously a large majority against the construction of an incinerator in Norfolk as shown by this poll. I doubt if there are more than 3 or 4 REAL people on this forum who are for it. A recent Radio Norfolk programme confirmed this. Councillors must not ignore the people they represent. The only proper poll conducted stated that 92% of the people of West Norfolk do not want one. If it does get the nod that doesn`t mean things will settle down. There is intense anger about the bulldozing through of this scheme. I agree with others.There must now been a government inquiry as to what really took place at County Hall. Even the independent financial report noted that they hadn`t been given all the facts. That is not acceptable. It`s clearly a shambles. This is about the health of our people, especially the young and old who will be particularly affected.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • I fail to see any reason for civil disobedience and that is hardly likely anyway. The council want to build so let them get on with it. Its not affecting anyone.

    Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • How about changing the poll title to 'should the Norfolk incinerator be built on the outskirts of Norwich instead' and see what kind of reaction we get...

    Report this comment

    Kermit

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • The amount of people who voted on this would no doubt be quite high, if they did mess about it would only amount to 1% at the most. The result is still a good indication, come on Eric Pickles finish it off Defra had already spoken and you will not go against them

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Thank you Martin wallis for making me laugh, the EDP sooo could do with a page of cerebral cabaret from yours truly. The voting is rigged, so all those aiming for a last minute saving of Murphy's bacon can be rest assured, to adopt the RPP would mean merga bucks compensation, cllrs. would land us with a bill of 111 million 111thousand 111.11 approx. If they build the monstrosity they will have to find an extra 164 million from us to replace the PFI, and they will have to find the same sum again, for policing the project. Twyford Down had a few thousand local supporters in Winchester, There are more than the 65.000 plus in west Norfolk opposed to this blatant disregard for thei9r health, just think of those who kept Costessy off the books. What little democracy we have left in councils, and by god, our councillors don't seem to have any backbone whatsoever, must be preserved, cabinets should not run rings around our representatives, so the sooner we get committee's set up the better, Ms. Gibson. If we can't rely on party political councillors to carry our mandate, and if these councillors elected don't act up on it, what are we left with? with regards to regress, seeing local democracy being subverted by a cabinet system that stinks to high heaven, backroom deals and too close a relationship with companies without regard of their reputation or standing within the law. So who will defend democracy when the police can't be bothered? the general public will do just fine.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • burner project is good thing for area and will give many job to people so voting yes to build.

    Report this comment

    Mr Raj Patel

    Friday, October 25, 2013

  • Go check Wheelabrator's planning documents. 40 jobs created to work in the big white elephant.. Not good economics to me. 25 years polluting the environment and The Wash for a bag of peanuts.

    Report this comment

    Jack

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Burning is clean and efficient. These incinerators are fantastic pieces of kit. We should welcome this technology. Kings Lynn could do with a boost to its economy. Full steam ahead I say.

    Report this comment

    Mr A. Schicklgruber

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • It was a bit stupid of Larson Whipsnade to tell everyone on here that fellow anti incinerator campaigner John Norton managed to vote 50 times in this poll. It seems the two must be connected for him to know this. He even goes on to explain how it was achieved. Talk about fiddle the books. After all the fuss these campaigners make about fair play they go and admit to doing this. It would be funny if it were not so serious. Any credibility they had vanished today.

    Report this comment

    Mad Dog

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • It is a shame that those who say yes do not say where they live. The original site was near Norwich, and the experts at the inquiry said the best place is on the coast near Yarmouth. Therefore is the best solution is to build it there?

    Report this comment

    Norfolk Mike

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • That Larson seems full of it. So the poll has been fixed by the anti incinerator crew has it ? They were accused of fixing the last one some how. If they can do it here then they probably did the same with the last one. I would guess about four people are against this in reality and the rest are just made up names on fiddled polls. At least the truth is now out. These campaigners cannot be trusted. They have proved that today.

    Report this comment

    Fanny Ayres

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Whatever it burns it should be built if it makes work for people and makes money. Burning is the best way to get rid of waste. Better than digging holes all over Norfolk. I hope they vote in favour Monday.

    Report this comment

    Mrs Willingale

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Arthur, the ash is polluted and you can use it all on your garden or farm if you like lead cadmium and dioxins, many of us don't. There are five times as many jobs in recycling, look it up you have got a computer as for the lie that council tax would go sky high, thats wrong as well, because its capped at 1.99% or it will trigger an expensive Norfolk referendum by us all. As for this being debated fairly by6 all, NO, for starters why does daisy not lament the failing debate by councillors, what about democracy does she not understand? Is she concerned that Cllrs. have not debated or haven't got a clue that cheaper options exist which cater better for our needs? why not Daisy? explain your onesided demand for an expensive referendum?

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Larson Whipsnade admits to voting 50 times (below) and this is so typical of the anti brigade to exploit something like this. Tells us all we need to know about this dirty campaign. Ignore the campaigners. There are probably only half a dozen of them using different names and voting 50 times each (which one of them now admits on this thread in public lower down). That means if we remove the cheating anti campaigners this poll is overwhelmingly in favour of support to build.

    Report this comment

    Stanley T

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • Why the obsession with a poll which is meaningless if not under the control of the electoral commision. I do and always have opposed the incinerator for many reasons. However my focus has now, after the publication of the reports for Monday, turned to the blinding financial miss management and negligence of officers within NCC. Every person in Norfolk should be concerned that contracts are being entered into without budgetry provision being made or insurance against loss attributable to those contracts being taken out. The authority through its incompetence has put itself on the verge of bankruptcy if NCC are now telling the truth! The poll is irrelevant by comparison!

    Report this comment

    Joy, King's Lynn

    Sunday, October 27, 2013

  • This Norfolk wide poll gives a far better picture of the feeling in the councty. Well done EDP for putting things right. I think we should build an incinerator and so do all my friends and family.

    Report this comment

    Diss 'N' Dat

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Forgive me for asking, but if you don't build an incinerator and the land fill site is full, and no one wants a new landfill site near them what exactly are you going to do? you either have to have one or the other, its no good saying we must recycle more, because there is only so much that can be recycled, and if the answer is take it to landfill sites further afield then that is going to cost the taxpayer more as the haulier is not going to cover the cost... I have my own incinerator and I burn everything at home so it doesn't bother me..

    Report this comment

    Footyboy16

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Of course Democrat but won't it be fun to know they have been spending their evening and weekend logging in and out with different names? We'll see some new ones appear as those rather offensive and childish ones have gone, let's welcome a few more of our Eastern European and Asian friends - Asif.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Poll: Should Norfolk County Council scrap plans for the King’s Lynn incinerator um, I don't want to be picky (oh alright yes I do) but isn't the title of this article a question? In which case shouldn't it have a question mark?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Joy don't forget NCC involvement in the Outer Harbour fiasco

    Report this comment

    John L Cooper

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • Alecto carries a high opinion. Wow ! My view is that council tax will rise quite a lot if this does not go ahead. I would prefer it to stay lower and I implore those councillors to vote to have this plant built.

    Report this comment

    Magwitch

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

  • this story does not feature among the Most Read stories, but it DOES feature among the Most Commented Stories which is fine and dandy as far as it goes: but 62 comments? that doesn't shed any light whatsoever on the number of votes cast does it? 54% 43% and 4% of WHAT? we cannot assume that every visitor voted. and in any case 54% of 62 is... 33. strewth, keep that to yourselves! 33 for, 27 agin and 2 don't nose: with the utter confusion now enveloping this burning issue, I'm frankly surprised that the Not Sures don't stand at 100%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Saturday, October 26, 2013

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: 12°C

min temp: 10°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT