Friday 13 August 2010

SUSSEX EXPRESS - Hailsham - Polegate - Herstmonceux Edition

Landraise threat still on the cards - by CHRIS EYTE

A LANDRAISE scheme could still be set up in the Sussex Express news area - despite a review promised by the new LibCon Government.

East Sussex County Council has been considering five 60-acre potential landraise sites for 25 metre high, 25 hectare rubbish tips including near Golden Cross, Hellingly, and sewerage works at Berwick.

Residents, MPs and councillors have raised objections to the idea. Veolia, allegedly the largest waste management and recycling business in the UK, stated in March it has no interest in the scheme.

The Express asked the county council if the review would be affected by new policies under the new Government.

A county council- spokesman said: "The Government has indicated that planning authorities should continue to prepare their waste plans and we are proceeding to prepare our waste and minerals core strategy.

"The Coalition Agreement identifies that there will be radical reform of the planning system in the longer term but this framework has yet to emerge.

"The Government has also commenced a review of the National Waste Strategy. All these factors will be taken into account in the preparation of the next stages of the Core Strategy."

County is reviewing points raised by many residents and campaign groups during a public consultation which ended in January.

The county spokesman added: "We will, in due course, publish an analysis of the consultation and there is also additional technical work to be undertaken. There will be a further dialogue with the communities and individuals that have previously engaged with us on this matter."

Both MPs Charles Hendry (Wealden) and Norman Baker (Lewes and Polegate) have critisized the proposals.

Charles Hendry remained convinced, as a local MP, that the locations were 'completely inappropriate for landraise facilities' and he was 'absolutely committed' to making sure the council knew the full range of options.

He said: "The coalition Government has made it clear that it wants landfill and landraise only to be used as a last resort for dealing with waste. It has said that it will from front introduce a floor price in the landfill levy so the cost of landfill will be maintained at a high level so there will be even greater incentives to explore other options.

"As Energy Minister, I am committed to seeing joined up thinking on waste management issues, making sure that we see how we can get energy from waste, rather than dumping it in open countryside."

Norman Baker called landraise 'an abomination that has no place in 21st century Britain'. He said the county council should 'recognise this' and not proceed with the proposals.

He told the Express: "The Coalition Agreement rightly endorses modern forms of waste treatment such as anaerobic digestion rather than out-of-date approaches such as incineration, let alone the medieval idea of building mountains of waste on green fields which the county council is apparently happy to countenance. The council's lack of imagination and ambition when it comes to waste matters is really quite depressing."

Wealden District Council has also been concerned about the county council's landraise ideas.

Cllr Roy Galley said: "Many of our residents expressed their concerns to us about the lack of consultation on this important matter and were horrified at the prospect of landraise within a district like Wealden.

"We share our residents' concerns and we particularly welcome the fact that the county council is carefully considering these views and has proposed that there will be a further round of informal consultation."

21 May 2010

'.. Draft Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report - Consultation.

In January 2009, the council appointed Scott Wilson Consultants to undertake a Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of the emerging Local Development Framework Core Strategy and associated Development Plan Documents (DPDs). The SA is a statutory requirement that must be undertaken in accordance with the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) ..'

Another example of 'gobbledygook' (this time associated with Epping)

Why is it that Scott Wilson Consultants seem to have an inside track to local council contracts. Various other consultants employed by the general public (at their own expense) have found the Scott Wilson report Scott Wilson Land Disposal Area Identification Study on land raise sites within East Sussex to be flawed in a number of important areas and also that it failed to take account of numerous issues.

.. and yet the herd mentality approach remains and they continue to be the consultants of choice for councils - WHY?

Reference

Daily Mail - Sir Humphrey is alive and well in Epping

THOUSANDS of villagers have taken up the fight against “medieval” plans for monstrous mountains of waste in a ­ picturesque part of Britain.

ESCC County planners have earmarked five 60-acre sites near rural homes, rivers and ancient woodland to dump 80ft mounds of rubbish ......

Daily Express Newspaper - 21 February 2010

This is a worrying statement from Rupert Clubb, East Sussex’s director of transport and environment

Mr Clubb said they were analysing 3,000 responses to a consultation which closed in January. He added: “There are some well-considered and well-informed responses that might influence a future decision but it is too early for me to say.”

Now hang on here - NO mention has been made about the historic objections raised the last time around. What is happening about the historic objections by CLEAR and others; could ESCC please confirm that they have these historic objections in their posession and that they will be taken into account

Will ESCC please place all the previous historic objections into the public domain so that we know they are being considered as part of the process

'.. MIGHT INFLUENCE A FUTURE DECISION ..' - so it really does't matter how many reasoned arguments against land raise are put forward it could all be for nothing, because someone in ESCC makes an arbitrary decison behind closed doors!

It would seem that the only thing that '.. might influence ..' anything is an impending election rather than any cogent argument. Don't forget that this is a political world and we are lead to believe that the only reason ESCC abandoned the last land raise attempt was because those in power feared being voted out in a backlash over land raise. Perhaps the ballot box is the only way force the current land raise plans to be re-thought; it is just a pity we cannot vote some East Sussex County Council empolyees out of office! 

Can ESCC please provide names and qualifications of all those who will be involved in the decison process so that we can be assured of sufficient competency, impartiality and also that it is not already a 'done deal'

(see Norman Baker - '.. it is a matter of record that the councils decided to enter into a contract with Onyx to provide an incinerator before this Public Inquiry even began..'