CHAIN "appalled" with council's decision not to fight waste plant (From Northwich Guardian)
Send us news, start your message Cheshire News and your send photos and videos to 80360
CHAIN "appalled" with council's decision not to fight waste plant
8:00am Tuesday 30th October 2012 in News
By Emma Rigby
OPPONENTS against an energy from waste plan approved for Lostock Gralam have been left “appalled” and “disgusted” after Cheshire West and Chester Council (CWAC) decided not to take legal action against the plans.
Campaigners were left reeling after the Government announced its decision to allow Tata Chemicals Europe and E.ON to build the sustainable energy plant of Griffiths Road, but felt some relief after CWAC decided to see if it had grounds to challenge the plans.
However, after seeking advice from counsel, CWAC has decided it would be “irresponsible” to risk large amounts of taxpayers’ money pursuing a case deemed unsustainable.
A spokesperson for Cheshire Anti Incinerator Network (CHAIN) said: “On behalf of our thousands of supporters, CHAIN is appalled and disgusted with CWAC’s decision not to support the people of Northwich and treat them as second class citizens yet again.
“You can bet that if the TATA monstrosity were going up less than a mile from the centre of Chester that a very different view would be taken.
“CHAIN with others continues to examine the possibility of mounting a legal challenge including the involvement of a QC.
“Several people have contacted us to say that their Council Tax would be better spent on financing legal action to prevent the quality of their lives being ruined by the waste incinerator.”
Leader of CWAC, Clr Mike Jones, said: “This Council strongly objected to the proposal and represented those objections at the enquiry.
“It made no secret of its concerns at the decision and promptly instructed leading counsel to advise on the possibilities of seeking Judicial Review.
“Whilst initial legal advice discounted grounds for success, counsel is currently reviewing further points put to the authority by local members.
“Should the advice remain unchanged, it would be patently irresponsible to risk large amounts of taxpayers’ money – estimated at around £100,000 – pursuing a case deemed unsuitable.
“Such expenditure, flying in the face of expert advice, would be unlikely to escape the attention of the District Auditor.
“CHAIN’s baffling ‘second class citizens’ remark conveniently overlooks the fact that this authority and its partners are spending many millions of pounds on the regeneration of Northwich, amid one of the worst financial climates experienced by this country in half a century.
“Yet, however aggrieved we may feel, Council reaction will be futile if dictated only by emotion and not founded on expert legal and strategic planning guidance.”
Comments(25)
WHS
says...
12:17pm Tue 30 Oct 12
WHS.
Hibernian
says...
2:58pm Tue 30 Oct 12
This is another shambles by a government minister, and this decision will surely be remembered at the next elections. . We'll also remember how hard our councillors and MPs fought this proposal (or didn't...). Simple common sense is all it needs to see that you don't import waste for burning to an area that recycles its rubbish.
WHS
says...
3:18pm Tue 30 Oct 12
WHS.
GadbrookTNT
says...
5:26pm Tue 30 Oct 12
WHS
says...
6:45pm Tue 30 Oct 12
It is no good trying to justify this decision, it is WRONG for all sorts of reasons and right for only one, it puts money into the pockets of a foreign owned company whose only interest to make big profits. What is in it for we the local people? Absolutely nothing, apart from a few jobs and even that is misleading for how many jobs will be lost because house building grinds to a halt and shops fail to find owners.
WHS.
WHS.
L Byrne
says...
10:42pm Tue 30 Oct 12
By contrast, Northwich was short changed by Cheshire West and Chester Council of which Mr Jones is leader. Result, the town could become a dumping ground for the garbage of millions of Londoners and any others willing to pay TATA to take it off their hands.
The facts speak for themselves.
However, the Council still has time and the opportunity to do the right thing by getting an experienced expert QC to review all aspects of the Government's decision. Surely the people of Northwich deserve that.
WHS
says...
10:26am Wed 31 Oct 12
WHS.
I'm Not A scouser
says...
4:59pm Wed 31 Oct 12
There is a big difference, thats the reason the Middlewich incinerator was eventually turned down, the Energy from Waste plant was given the go ahead.
The council realise this and thats why they have chosen not to appeal the decision, which is the right thing to do.
WHS
says...
5:49pm Wed 31 Oct 12
WHS.
L Byrne
says...
7:15pm Wed 31 Oct 12
You got it absolutely right.
As the expression goes; if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a duck!
The same goes for incinerators!
GadbrookTNT
says...
8:04pm Wed 31 Oct 12
MrDaveS
says...
9:56pm Wed 31 Oct 12
L Byrne
says...
10:40pm Wed 31 Oct 12
With great respect, you are confusing the process which the plant uses with the form of it's output.
I agree that one of its outputs is energy along with emissions some of which are hazardous or toxic.
Correspondingly, the process used to generate those outputs is, simply, the incineration of waste.
It is therefore legitimate to for them to be called incinerators.
Until a few years ago,everybody called these plants 'incinerators' including their protagonists.Then the industry spin doctors decided the name needed to be prettified and they came up with Energy from Waste plants and such like, all designed to con the public, particularly those forced to live near them.
Regarding 'state of the art, highly regulated' etc, it is worth remembering that these were the very words which were used to describe incinerators when they were been built twenty years ago. Now everybody agrees that they were toxic deathtraps. Makes you think.
Sue Statham
says...
1:28am Thu 1 Nov 12
I consulted The Oxford Reference Dictionary:
incinerate: to consume by fire
incinerator: furnace or device for incinerating things
Tata/E-On's "efw"plant does exactly that, so one could say without fear of contradiction, that whatever else it purports to be, it IS an incinerator. Because of Government and Health Protection Agency's assertions that "modern well run incinerators pose little, if any, threat to health" some may feel perfectly safe living in close proximity to an incinerator.
Take the time, as I did, to contact the Environment Agency and request a list of breaches of emissions by incinerators. With this documented information, you will be able to read for yourself what does come out of incinerator stacks, and what could potentially come out of the incinerator proposed for Lostock.. Armed with the facts, I am confident that the assertions by Government agencies about your safety and well-being whilst living in close proximity to an incinerator will not seem so comforting.
I read on a House of Commons website that "modern incinerators are much safer than the older generation of incinerators, but just how safe we do not know". So why are they building one near our homes and schools ? Another quote was that "incinerators tend to be built in the poorer parts of counties, or where there is least objection".
So which of these might Northwich be?I am appalled at the decision by Government to sanction the incinerator and also totally disillusioned by CWAC Council which seems to be letting it all go ahead without even attempting to put up a fight.
I'm Not A scouser
says...
8:04am Thu 1 Nov 12
The night that pollutes the atmosphere with more toxins and hazardous particles than every incinerator and EfW plant in the country
15% off all the UK's dioxins emitted per year come from bonfire night.
Will any of the opposers be going to see a bonfire, or a firework display this year?
GadbrookTNT
says...
9:13am Thu 1 Nov 12
JL Brown
says...
8:24pm Thu 1 Nov 12
And MrDaveS is being optimistic if he thinks this is a well regulated industry. It is as well regulated as banking, that is, it is a self regulated industry where the operator reports on their adherence to rules and how safe they have been. Breeches of emission standards are allowed for days on end and external inspection is as common as hens' teeth.
tracy manfredi
says...
12:19am Fri 2 Nov 12
I'm Not A scouser
says...
12:56am Fri 2 Nov 12
tracy manfredi wrote:Quite true Tracy
Oh dear it's the same old same old.....
"we are all going to be poisoned etc etc"
blah blah
tracy manfredi
says...
6:06pm Fri 2 Nov 12
tedrobphoto
says...
7:48pm Sun 4 Nov 12
For the times that the wind is out of the East I would suggest that Gas Masks should be provided free of charge!
tracy manfredi
says...
7:53pm Sun 4 Nov 12
Or colder days when the gases and emissions are cooled quicker or create a fog over Northwich
I'm Not A scouser
says...
4:47pm Mon 5 Nov 12
Dont forget that!
JL Brown
says...
6:51pm Mon 5 Nov 12
And you know that the additional HGVs will have an effect on local people. The problem may be detecting its size when a third of people already get cancers and a fifith die from them.
Don't forget that!
tracy manfredi says...
11:21am Tue 30 Oct 12
The decision to allow the plant is extremely disappointing to say the least for those living in the area, work in the area or who remain concerned with regards to the health of their families.