The Government is considering reopening the public inquiry because Ken Livingstone’s London Plan requires people to deal with their own waste. Most of the waste for the Bexley based Incinerator was due to be transported from the Western Riverside Waste Authority boroughs of Wandsworth, Hammersmith & Fulham, Lambeth and K & C. If Belverdere is rejected by the Government, then these boroughs will have to either take recycling more seriously, or build their own Incinerator (i.e. a site at Nine Elms has been mentioned).
Green Party member of the London Assembly, Darren Johnson, said:
“Local authorities in London should be investing in state of the art recycling facilities, rather than filling in holes and burning up our natural resources. If councils like Wandsworth and Kensington and Chelsea were faced with an incinerator being built next to Battersea Park, then they would soon find the will and a way to recycle more. Instead, they are being half hearted about their ability to recycle and seem happy to send their waste to be burnt in Bexley.”
The Greens are lobbying the Mayor to reject any further large-scale incinerators and to adopt a “Zero Waste” approach instead. This would involve effective measures to reduce London’s growing mountain of waste and deal with the vast majority of the remainder by re-use, recycling and composting. They point to the success of other cities, which have adopted “Zero Waste”, in reducing use of landfill without introducing incineration, which is damaging to health and a waste of valuable materials which can be used again.
“We are calling on the Mayor to reject the new incinerator at Belvedere. Instead, he should insist that the waste authority, and its member boroughs, dramatically increase their recycling and composting rates. 92% of the average wheelie bin can be recycled or composted. We do not need incineration which is hugely unpopular.” Said Darren
Notes to Editor:
1. The Government’s deadline for supporters of the Incinerator to respond to its decision to reopen the public enquiry was the 18th February. Having consulted, the Government now have to make a final decision.
2. Green on the London Assembly have launched a 10 point plan for Zero Waste which includes:
· “Money-back” schemes for the return of glass bottles and other reusable containers to be introduced.· Plastic bags to be taxed at 10p a bag.· Reuse and refurbishment centres, for furniture and electrical goods, such as cookers and washing machines, to be open in each London locality. Local ‘swap’ days to be held. · By 2006 all London households to get a weekly doorstep recycling collection which covers the full range of recyclable products, including paper, card, glass, cans, foil, textiles and shoes, plastic, batteries, motor oil, mobile phones and toner and ink cartridges.· All litter bins to have separate compartments for paper, glass, cans and plastic.
3. A new generation of incinerators is being planned around London and local communities and environmentalists are opposing these. The planned Belvedere incinerator in South East London has been to a Public Inquiry. The proposed Edmonton B incinerator is being resisted by local people, and Slough Council has sought outside legal advice to revoke the planning permission it gave to the proposed Colnbrook incinerator, sited just outside London very close to Hillingdon. Whilst new generation incinerators are cleaner than the older ones, they are typically bigger and still produce some toxic emissions and toxic ash, add to climate change gases, and encourage, rather than discourage, waste and recycling.
4. A copy of the WRWA Draft Waste Strategy is available at www.wrwa.gov.uk
5. The letter from the Secretary of State states that:
"In accordance with Rule 16(4) of the Inquiries Procedure Rules the Secretary of State is not able to come to a decision at variance with a recommendation of the Inspector without first notifying the attendees at the Public Inquiry. The Secretary of State therefore invites the Company and those parties who attended and gave evidence at the public inquiry to make their views known to her on the contents of this letter and as to whether she should re-open the public inquiry."