Search

Norwich Weather

Rain

Rain

max temp: 23°C

min temp: 16°C

Government withdraws funding for west Norfolk incinerator

PUBLISHED: 13:35 18 October 2013 | UPDATED: 17:08 18 October 2013

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

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

Archant © 2013

Plans to build an incinerator in west Norfolk have suffered a major blow after the government announced it was withdrawing funding for the project.

Environment minister Lord de Mauley today wrote to South West Norfolk MP Elizabeth Truss with the news.

He wrote: “I am writing to let you know that following a review of the WIC [waste infrastructure credits] allocated to the Norfolk County Council residual waste infrastructure project, ministers have decided to withdraw the award of funding to the project.”

Lord de Mauley’s letter to Elizabeth Truss

Lord de Mauley’s letter to George Nobbs

The proposals for the burner at Saddlebow provoked massive opposition in the west of Norfolk.

Earlier this week, council officers warned that if the government rejected the plan, the council would have to pay just over £20m in compensation to Cory Wheelabrator and say the figure could be much higher if, as some councillors want, the council pulls out.

Ms Truss said: “I have always argued that over a hundred million pounds on subsiding a plant that local residents did not want is a poor use of taxpayers money. I am pleased to hear that Defra has listened to these arguments. I call on the county council to now abandon plans for the incinerator and work towards a comprehensive waste policy that commands the support of local residents.”

FROM THE ARCHIVES - 2011

An incinerator for Norfolk - the case for and against

Norfolk incinerator - special report

Norfolk incinerator: political analysis

Incinerator vote sparks anger

We’ll fight to stop it, votes West Norfolk council

Postcards to Queen in King’s Lynn incinerator protest

Norfolk County Council leader George Nobbs said he was disappointed that Defra was withdrawing the waste infrastructure grant worth £169m over 25 years for The Willows waste treatment contract.

The announcement comes just days before an extraordinary meeting of the full council is to be held on Monday, October 28, to debate the future of the contract which the council has signed with Cory Wheelabrator.

The county council was told this morning that the grant was being withdrawn and Cllr Nobbs has now instructed officers to prepare reports on the financial consequences for the authority.

FROM THE ARCHIVES - 2012

Analysis: Incinerator process has been ‘marked by animosity and personal attacks

Campaigners say the battle is not over

Norfolk County Council signs contract with Cory Wheelabrator for King’s Lynn incinerator

He said: “Today’s announcement clearly adds a new dimension to the debate about waste disposal in Norfolk.

“I have instructed officers to report back in time for the Full Council meeting, which I am glad is taking place, so that we have an informed debate around all the issues. I have always recognised that people on all sides of this debate have sincerely held views that need to be aired as part of this process.

“Nonetheless, the council is still bound by the contract entered into by the previous administration.

“Make no mistake, which ever way you choose to look at it, this is more bad news from this Government for Norfolk taxpayers.”

West Norfolk council leader Nick Daubney said: “I’m pleased sense has prevailed.

“The conditions set down to secure PFI funding weren’t met and we made our protestations to ministers at the time.

“The biggest poll ever held in this county didn’t support it. The capital city of this county didn’t support it.”

FROM THE ARCHIVES - 2013

Ditching Norfolk incinerator could lead to £90m bill, council report claims

Air quality – effects ‘not significant’, inquiry is told

Inquiry hears King’s Lynn incinerator would not damage common

A Defra spokesperson said: “We are investing over £3.5 billion in waste infrastructure projects to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfill, promote recycling and stimulate economic growth.

“The amount of waste sent to landfill is at its lowest level while recycling rates have been increasing year on year and are now the highest on record.

“Given that we expect to have sufficient infrastructure in England to enable us to meet the EU target of reducing waste sent to landfill and considering all other relevant factors, the decision has been taken not to fund the Norfolk project.”

The meeting of all members of the county council on October 28 will begin in the Council Chamber at 10am. The council’s cabinet will meet the next day at 9am to consider any issues arising from the previous day’s debate.

108 comments

  • Amusing to see the slanging and insults from the pro campaign who, now faced with facts, resort to childish insults. DEFRA have clearly stated incineration is NOT needed and current practice has improved the landfill situation. Accept the fact. As for the NIMBYISM I'd object to other efw plants, and have done to other UK ones.

    Report this comment

    d, west lynn

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • "... we regularly monitor information on waste infrastructure projects... Having updated our infrastructure forecasting model... we consider it 'sufficiently likely' that the EU Landfill Directive targets will be met without a contribution from the NCC Project. This was the overriding factor in the review" (de Mauley to Nobbs, 18 October 2013, p2 para 4). In other words, THAT's why Defra pulled the plug on the PFI credits. Lordy Lordy. One of the core arguments advanced by pro-incinerator folk is that were NCC to 'renege upon' the KLWN burner contract that would inevitably have a negative reputational fallout for future NCCprivate sector projectsPFI: trust would be compromised. But unless I have misunderstood what's happened here, the decision was Defra's - based on their 'updated infrastructure forecasting model'. Somebody in the bowels of Defra at Nobel House thought in between polishing off a Jumbo Subway with frites and slipping in another caffeine enema) "hangonamo, isn't it about time that I checked out the latest intelligence on our infrastructure forecasting model. Crikey. Pull the PFI. Somebody get de Mauley!!!" Does this not have implications for local authorityprivate sectorPFI agreements countrywide? Won't the private sector be wary of getting into bed with local authorities, not because local authorities are inheremntly unreliable but for fear that Defra (in this instance) might pull the plug on PFI credits if and when the updated forecasting model is consulted and tells them to do so? Aren't we in la-la land here? Leaving aside, for now, the ticklish question of just how robust the concept of SUFFICIENTLY might be under rigorous forensic scrutiny (not to mention semantic examination) in a court of law? Cough up, Defra.

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • Taxi for Jackson - there is little to keep him hanging round and I'm betting he will jump ship pretty quickly now he knows there's nothing to be gained by haunting the corridors of county hall any longer. What a nice mess for Ms McNeil to find on her return from her 'holiday'....

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Has anyone read the letter? The review of the PFI'S came about due to a breach of the conditions under which they were awarded. Now I wonder what on earth could have prompted that?

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Where is he? Didn`t his contacts in high places tell him this would happen. Well done everyone for your input.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Take a look at the Cabinet minutes, I think you’ll find the current leader isn’t quite so keen to abolish the system now he’s in the small clique.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • Hilarious watching Henry Belling squirm on Look East, when he criticised the County Council forgetting it was his discredited lot who got us into this mess.

    Report this comment

    Johnboy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Time for a few more officers to leave NCC? Having got things wrong,they should resign and, again,no reward for failure!!

    Report this comment

    andy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • So, a breach in the Ts and Cs has been identified, leading to the withdrawal of the PFI - I can't wait to hear Bill 'Everything should be shown that we have done things by the book' Borrett on Radio Norfolk tonight, finally holding his hands up and admitting that he was wrong on several occasions and that the Norfolk taxpayer has been badly misled as a result.....

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • I read the letter and am now about to read the report-sufficiently likely does not mean absolutely will. So we could still incur charges as council tax payers if we send our refuse to landfill. Nor should we ignore that this incinerator was commissioned to comply with the demands and impositions of the Labour government in agreement with the EU and not any imposed by aTory government. Situations can change -a sudden depression of the economies of the Far East could affect demand for materials for instance, leaving it on our hands. .And how long before the concern about the expense of sorting and shipping so called recyclable materials, only for them to be put in landfill or incinerated in the Far East or to be processed in heavily polluting systems in African countries actually gets through the thick green hides of the idealists?

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • HB and ET - thanks David but one more thing. Can you get central office, the Murphys, or whoever it is, to stop posting on this website under the name of Daisy Roots? It is now so transparent that the postings are fake that no one believes them any more.

    Report this comment

    andy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Landfill space is still filling up, .We need to get European approval for the next step.An urgent answer is needed. As for the 9 signatories, I think there is an indemnity which means they can't be held financially responsible. Will NCC comment on this?

    Report this comment

    bedoomed

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Told you so!!

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • So then, no one wants an incinerator on their doorstep, no one wants a new landfill site on their doorstep, so its a stalmate.. the rubbish will stack up and up.. BRILLIANT IDEA.. you only have 2 options and the idiots don't want either.. I am ok as I have my own personal incinerator lol...

    Report this comment

    Footyboy16

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • NCC signed the contract once they had secured the PFI funding. It was well known to all that there was no consensus of county support and Jackson’s emails with certain helpful Defra officials show a shared culpability. Defra officials, the Waste Project Board, Cabinet Members, Planning Committee, Council Leaders expressing non-existing support - enough for a whip round to cover the compensation payments, and then perhaps the people of Norfolk should counter-claim against CW for the wasted £millions?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • derrick murphy and bill borrett have left the county council high and dry. now all across the county we will pay the price

    Report this comment

    DB

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Daisy, the stench and deacy from the throwaway economic prowess you still dream of, comes form our waste, yours and mine. You are seemingly prepared to cover it all up and leave it to our children to sort it out, or wait for water courses to get contaminated, I do not want to wait for this dangerous legacy, which is really a job opportunity, to become an expensive emergency situation. Out of sight out of mind is your prefered option, dig it all in, or burn it all, gosh, I hope you are not a councillor.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Ah yes, I'd forgotten about poor old Cllr Castle who has so much trouble tripping over all those nasty old wheelie bins that he want's to forget all about recycling and incinerate everything from a single black bag. Well done him - he may get what he wishes for on his own doorstep now, seeing as he loves the idea so much. Great Yarmouth beware....

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Does anyone remember predictions of NCC services collapsing when they negligently lost 32 million in the icelandic banking fiasco? That was years ago and not all of the funds have been recovered yet! It suits officers, and the jester, to predict the end of the world, as we know it, if the minimum 20-30 million payable if the revised project plan is refused but they are delighted to condem our purse to 669 million over 25 years without blinking. Are they really that stupid or is there something sinister behind this. In view of the entire NCC budget the 20-30 figure is a drop in the ocean, 669 is another matter. DEFRA were the driving force behind the proposal, not NCC who were mere pawns, DEFRA now have the NAO firmly on their backs and have realised they need to reverse some incredibly bad decisions they took! They have left NCC in the sticky stuff but NCC must realise that Norfolk cant afford to fund the project any further. To carry on will see further legal battles ending ultimately in the European courts, once there with no government backing and the project breaching EU directives it will finally be condemed to the bin. Will cost us many many millions in compensation to cory wheelabrator though!

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • Has anyone asked Mr Borrett for a comment?

    Report this comment

    Catty

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • At last some common sense

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Honest John Thats very true, well said

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • This is truly excellent news, a gang of rogue Tories and officers of self importance caused this problem by signing up to a silly idea long before it was debated and agreed. They should now be held accountable whether they are still elected or employed or not, its been a total waste of money and officers will have a field day blaming all the counties debts and poor management on the decision. This County Council need bringing back into line and the corruption and underhanded actions must stop.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • So then, no one wants an incinerator on their doorstep, no one wants a new landfill site on their doorstep, so its a stalmate.. the rubbish will stack up and up.. BRILLIANT IDEA.. you only have 2 options and the idiots don't want either.. I am ok as I have my own personal incinerator lol...

    Report this comment

    Footyboy16

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Pity the EDP did not point out the following quote from the letter. The review was prompted by a breach of the terms and conditions under which funding was originally agreed!!! A breach of the terms and conditions I wonder who is responsible for that? The letter also points out that the landfill targets will be met without an incinerator in Norfolk. Where is Di.ckens?

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Oh he`s back and he still can`t admit defeat. Yes, in the short term it will cost ratepayers but in the long there will be a financial, health and environmental gain. This is the end of talk of incinerators in Norfolk. Even Great Yarmouth won`t be asked to accept one. I shall campaign against that as well if it is suggested. Thrashing around by Dickeng is now taking place in order to save some face. There`s none left to save!

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Conversation a few weeks ago - Elizabeth Truss and Henry Bellingham to David Cameron. Look David, this incinerator thing - we are going to have to do something about it. In May, UKIP very nearly wiped the floor with us in the local elections and we lost control of NCC. At this rate the same will happen in 2015 and a lot of us will lose our seats. Have a word with DEFRA and get them to withdraw the grant on a technicality or something.... you heard here first!!!

    Report this comment

    andy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • All this on and off business is a bit wearing. The council is independent of anyone anyway and they can do as they please without anyone's permission. The PFI credits were OK but not needed. Just a bit of icing. NCC will still go ahead but it will just mean more cuts now the campaigners have lost us all this money.

    Report this comment

    Inactive account

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Honest John. I couldn't possibly comment. Honestly John :-) but I will... where does the burden of 'due diligence' lie here?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • The public inquiry must record similar concerns as Defra and I expect a multitude of other anomalies linked with the Kings Lynn site. Defra say NCC do not meet the criteria for PFI credits, so they know the contract is financially unsound and would be foolhardy for NCC to proceed with the incinerator. One of NCC burn to kill merchants was speaking on TV last night and mentioned with the PFI Norfolk would save £8 million per annum and without the credits they would save £1.7 million. With a huge increase in recycling these figures have to be inflated and out of date, shortage of feedstock for incinerators Europe-wide will put Norfolk into realms of paying a surcharge the day the proposed burner was planned to start production.

    Report this comment

    NCIS

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • we need to closely look at the two highly paid council officers who flew to the states and were lobbied by the yanks. On their recommendations the deal was struck.

    Report this comment

    nrg

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • No idea, it would very much depend when the T&Cs were breached.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • Those saying council tax will rise, might like to know that any rise is limited to 1.9%. Anything higher requires a referendum at considerable cost to the counties tax payers. If it was agreed and it was higher, then the council would loose the money it gets from central government for keeping any increase below 1.9%. Full details are in the minutes from Sept's council meeting.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Wow!People power might just work.Very much appreciated Cllr,Daubney's reference to the fact that "the capital city of this county didn't support it".One conclusion of this that any future proposal for a unitary county would provoke widespread opposition across the county,not just Norwich.Unitary districts including some possible amalgamations and boundary changes,are clearly the way forward.On a personal level working in a team for the people of Norwich to increase their recycling rates for 7 years so now Norwich is top of the league for recycling in Norfolk seems all worthwhile.What incentives are there to reuse,reduce and recycle when there is a burner that needs constant feeding?

    Report this comment

    Peter Watson

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • The council owns a huge site in the middle of nowhere, but much closer to the main source of the waste to be incinerated (Norwich) and the district council in that are voted in favour of incineration. SO - it's simple.... build it at Coltishall !

    Report this comment

    Rotciv

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Special thanks to the idiotic political interference of Bellingham & Truss. Now we can all foot the bill instead over the next 25 years instead of Central Government. How on earth did these two ever get elected ? Have a look on the internet at the Council tax paid on a luxury six bed roomed house in Westminster London and then look at the same sized house in Norfolk. How come Norfolk is so much more ? At the rate these two are going no one will be able to afford to live in a bed-sit in Norfolk. The council taxes will go off the scale now and services will be scaled down to nothing. Anyone want to buy a cheap house ?

    Report this comment

    George Peters

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Yes! One step closer to not having loads of our taxes subsidising hundreds of HGVs needed to feed the efw burner monster thundering along the country lanes south of King's Lynn! And George Peters - this expensive debacle isn't the fault of Bellingham & Truss - it's the fault of the bunch of Tories that used to treat the county council as their private plaything.

    Report this comment

    M

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Re-the highly paid council officers...have they both flown the nest? one retired, the other dispatched to the west country?

    Report this comment

    nrg

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • Bearing in mind government findings indicated a "breach of terms and conditions",wouldn't it be more appropriate in the circumstances to bring forward the National Audit Office enquiry?The outcome of any such enquiry may find other "breaches" which could bring the legality of the contract with Cory into question.It's needed now,not next year.

    Report this comment

    Peter Watson

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • It was quite obvious what was going to happen, everything was exaggerated especially the amount of waste and the viability, you can only lie for so long. Keep the recycling rates up and a large percentage of the waste problem will go away. If anybody has wasted money and cost the tax payer a fortune its Norfolk County Council

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • lets not feed the troll with a thousand dirty names.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • Not many to be honest - its likely that the Government will step in to help out here but it may mean that other idiotic pipe dreams such as Iffy Cliffy's rubbish airbase needs to be put up for sale. Oh, and better financial advice in future so they don't go investing taxpayers money in dodgy Icelandic banks too....

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • You are totally out of your depth Dickeng. It will be cancelled at the full meeting because this is about much more than the incinerator. There are some honourable county councillors. Think about it (if you can!).

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • This is truly excellent news, a gang of rogue Tories and officers of self importance caused this problem by signing up to a silly idea long before it was debated and agreed. They should now be held accountable whether they are still elected or employed or not, its been a total waste of money and officers will have a field day blaming all the counties debts and poor management on the decision. This County Council need bringing back into line and the corruption and underhanded actions must stop.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Memo Theresa Coffey to DC. Pleased that you helped HB and ET with the incinerator and stopped 'Daisy Roots' from posting. Having agreed to put a soft question to you at this week PMQs, can you now formally announce that you have listened to public opinion and the A14 will not be a toll road. You can give as an excuse that due to the improved economic conditions, there is money available after all....

    Report this comment

    andy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Well done to KLWIN, John Martin, Henry Bellingham, Elizabeth Truss and everyone that stood up to NCC. Time now for those councillors who were involved in the award of this contract to resign. And to a certain person, I always said those PFI's were unstable.

    Report this comment

    Bikerboy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Still stirring the pot, D.ick.ens? Tax payers should never have been made to shoulder the burden of this project anyway, especially as it'll be mainly reliant on waste from the commercial and industrial sectors in years to come. If private industry wants this sort of facility then they should be made to pay for it - that's what Dr Palm has done. If anyone is to blame then it's the last administration at county hall who were all in the thrall of senior officers, no one else.... of course, you're too blinded by sour grapes to accept that, aren't you?

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • When are the dafties going to take on board that this is not a choice between building a rotten expensive thrust upon us by fools type incinerator or landfill. Neither are options. Send the rubbish to those that are desperate for it while we seek out new and better technologies while increasing recycling and decreasing the amount of packaging that we have to put up with in the first place.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Fen, she must be one of the cllrs who struggle to read! The letter clearly states that Defra have analysed current evidence and concluded that the needed diversion from landfill targets will be met without a contribution from an incinerator in Norfolk. Rather than look at short term pain over the next 25 years this county will save an absolute fortune.

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Today is a red letter day in so many ways! Jackson had his going away party today. I should have posted this sooner but I couldn't stop laughing at such an appropriate going away present.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • YES YES YES!!!!!!

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Honest John. Prexactly. Which surely means, does it not, that it is in the public interest that the entire sequence of events from the very outset of this sorry mess should be subject to the sort of investigative journalism that any paper of record would be proud to conduct to expose the truth and retain the respect and trust of its readers?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • Congratulations George Nobbs-you can now hold your head up high and fulfil your Manifesto obliations to the electorate and get rid of the incinerator, without fear or favour!

    Report this comment

    arrowhead

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • This whole fiasco is a direct result of abuse of the democratic system in the monopolistic Tory-only cabinet of the previous administration, allowing power to go to the head of a small clique. At least the present administration is abolishing the cabinet system. In the meantime, is there any way that the previous lot can be brought to book for "abuse of process" ?

    Report this comment

    Geoff Hinchliffe

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • I meant £23m, of course. But there is a serious point here: "... we consider it sufficiently likely that the EU Landfill Directive targets will be met without a contribution from the NCC Project" (de Mauley's letter to Nobbs 18 Oct 2013) "This was the overriding factor in the review". In other words, THAT is why the PFI credits were pulled. In which case don't Defra have a moral responsibility to dip into their contingency funds (which they doubtless have) to offer NCC an interest-free loan to cover any 'breakage' charge to CW in the event that upon much much closer scrutiny the contract is declared binding? Or are the words 'moral' and 'government department' irreconcilable?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • If the somewhat timid tenor of Saturday's leader on the incinerator saga is anything to go by, there seems to be a certain inexplicable reluctance to hold the powers-that-be at County Hall to account. Would it be appropriate, therefore, to place this matter in the hands of a third party - those who have benefited from the 'mentoring' mission conducted by former Leader Derrick Murphy? Surely the good folk of the Turks & Caicos Islands would leap at the chance to put Mr Murphy's advice into practice and run the slide-rule over NCC http:tinyurl.compsssw9e? Even in this age of austerity and belt-tightening, the Foreign Office should be able to root around down the back of a sofa and find the price of an Economy Class return ticket for a delegation from TCI to restore the good name of NCC and advise on 'good governance? Do RyanAir fly the LutonCockburn Town route? This would be all the more apposite - and ironic - as Henry Bellingham MP (arch critic of the incinerator plan) was Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the FCO at the time, and may in fact have signed off Murphy's trip http:tinyurl.compudxxhf ?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • Now lets get over it and start planning for more jobs in landfill mining, gasplasma conversion, plastic to oil, and meanwhile lets see what Sweden or Holland are preparing to pay us for pour waste. We have still got to find out who and why these 9 signatories got into a contract we now have to pay compensation for. I propose to seize all assets of these nine in lieu of payment for their unmandated escapade. NCC's mismanagement and lack of democratic discourse should not be lumbered on us the taxpayers, but be on the head of those who went rogue and tried to cover it up. Will Cllr. Borrett take his hat now?

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • No Mr. bendoverboy, it was the general public which had to see that scrutiny is applied after cllr.s failed and officers colluded, only to breach the regulations. maybe you would like to put your hand in your pocket and pay for your ex leaders tomfoolery, and so should those who supported this ripp off.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • The coalition will collapse if the incinerator isn`t cancelled and Nobbs will lose power. This is more than about refuse. Consequently they will have to find a new way of dealing with waste in Norfolk.

    Report this comment

    democrat

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • An excellent move by NCC, in ensuring the WIC are removed they can make the project fully self funded and can press ahead without interference from the government.... only joking! How do you feel D.i.c.kens?!?!?!?! You are the laughing stock of Norfolk.

    Report this comment

    LynnLegend

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • The project will still go ahead because it has to. Contracts are signed and the deal has been done. All this means is that the anti campaigners have succeeded in reducing services for the people of Norfolk which will be almost £170 Million worse off. This is not something to celebrate unless your IQ is under 50 and you enjoy paying more council tax for less services.

    Report this comment

    TO55ERLONG

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Let's build it anyway. Then one at Thetford.

    Report this comment

    Max

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Oh dear the campaigners have lost the people of Norfolk a shed load of cash for nothing. What a pity. Remember to examine those council tax bills over the next few years. Will the last person leaving Norfolk remember to switch off the lights please ?

    Report this comment

    Dickens

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • This is truly excellent news, a gang of rogue Tories and officers of self importance caused this problem by signing up to a silly idea long before it was debated and agreed. They should now be held accountable whether they are still elected or employed or not, its been a total waste of money and officers will have a field day blaming all the counties debts and poor management on the decision. This County Council need bringing back into line and the corruption and underhanded actions must stop.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • not Benin, yew plonkeur. Belize!

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • What bothers me is how and why a certain MP gave this information to a protest group ahead of anyone else. The leader of Norfolk Council and all the councillors get to find this out two weeks later than the protestors who were told well in advance what was going to happen by the MP in question. Bit naughty that.

    Report this comment

    Removed User

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • £23? Nowt but a 'rounding error' in HMG's books. A mere bagatelle to someone of the stature and famously deep pockets of Lord Ashcroft, who is pouring money - his own private money - into the Tory cause to win the marginals at the 2015 GE. Surely Ashcroft, a 'local boy done good' (former pupil at the Norwich School) can be prevailed upon to stump up an interest-free loan to tide NCC over? no? Why not?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • Your IQ must be under 30, who is going to pay for it? And as the government said there is no justification of need, Jackson and co signec up to it so they should be responsible. Build it at Norwich if County need it so badly not in the middle of a flood zone.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Your IQ must be under 30, who is going to pay for it? And as the government said there is no justification of need, Jackson and co signec up to it so they should be responsible. Build it at Norwich if County need it so badly not in the middle of a flood zone.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • When the debate takes place on 28th October, I hope that Nobbs has insisted that the officers place before Council an accurate breakdown of what cancellation will cost NCC. Anything less than that and heads should roll. And no excuses about confidentiality preventing that disclosure. If those figures are not on the table then any debate is flawed. It should be a simple job for the NAO to verify those figures in time for the meeting. Why does Nobbs automatically assume that cancellation is bad news for rate payers?? Is that not prejudging the debate??

    Report this comment

    andy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Very many congrats to those who worked so hard for this especially the football hooligan Canary Boy. Pint mug of champagne for you!

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Well said Ben. This lot's game of politics over this whole issue across a number of years is costing all Norfolk residents who pay council tax an absolute fortune. They're all fiddling whilst Rome (or should it be Norfolk) burns. The whole lot of them, whether Labour, Tory, UKIP or whatever should be ashamed of the mess that they've created of all this.

    Report this comment

    inactive user

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • What good news and congratulations to all those so called ''anti's'' - Yes I agree we may well pay more in the end. We would anyway ( The Council taxpayers) NCC et al now have a bloody nose. We should now concentrate on bringing to book those who got us into this awful mess. Oh and by the way John Martin and I do not hide behind a pseudonym, for the benefit of those who keep criticising those who wish to fight for their right!

    Report this comment

    ron cornell

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • I wonder how many cuts are going to have to be made to pay fro this fiasco.

    Report this comment

    norman hall

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Steady on there Daisy Roots - by bemoaning the fact that an incinerator might suddenly pop up on YOUR doorstep instead you sound like one of the 'mouthy NIMBYs' you have been doing down so often. Funny that.

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • efficiency more important than emissions? thats to be argued, but cllr.s who band about terms like sustainable options or solutions, should wash their mouth out with soap because they do not know what they are talking about. If sustainability has only ever got to do with financing and efficiency, then we might as well let accountants run the council and disperse with cllr. alltogether.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Honest John. Hope springs eternal. But I can't find a single mention in today's EDP of the PFI U-turn, not even one letter on the letters page: very odd, as I wrote one, and I know other people did too. But here's a thought: the EDP are keeping their powder dry (they're professional hacks, after all). As we speak, I expect that Dan Grimmer is quite probably working his cotton socks off in the Turks & Caicos Islands sipping on a rum and coke and toking on a spliff - all in the line of duty, of course, and on expenses - carrying a letter from Mr Pickover inviting a delegation of TCIslanders to fly post haste to Norfuk (again) and conduct a thoroughgoing independent inwestigation into the whole sorry saga. No?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Monday, October 21, 2013

  • I find it strange that some posters blame the anti-incinerator campaigners for the costs incurred by NCC in this debacle. We live in a democracy. Common sense has prevailed. Both sides of the argument have been aired. It is those in NCC who have incurred the costs (if only there were some way to surcharge them), not the protesters. True the NCC have acted in a very non-democratic way, but no doubt all will come out in any future inquiry.

    Report this comment

    norfolkngood

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • There is an awful lot more to come out of this. Perhaps we can now have some honesty and integrity and answers to questions. I see no reason to give Cory Wheelabrator a plugged nickel unless we have these answers. Why were they chosen over the far far cheaper option. Why did the Council approve the contract before planning permission was granted. This is killed off the PFIs but we still need an answer to the question. And whilst the employees and councillors mull on this let me remind you that Councillors have indemnity insurance. That could pay for any fines that have to be paid because of the Council's dreadful behaviour over the past two years.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Can a Council be declared bankrupt?

    Report this comment

    Bruce87

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • The letter to Nobbs reveals that he has known that the award of the PFI has been under investigation since 13 June. Nobbs, the jester, is fully aware that the cheapest way to get out of this contract is to refuse the revised project plan. forget talk of 80 - 90 million he can walk away for 20 - 30 perhaps even less if it turns out that the breach of terms and conditions was due to an individual working in cahoots with the company. Daisy you comment that those fighting the incinerator here wont care if its built in Yarmouth. Some probably would!! Personally after the abuse you have thrown at us, the hoard of Gt Yarmouth cllrs who eagerly sat on the planning committee in place of West Norfolk members and cllr Castles continued love of the project I would not even tell you where to start researching or objecting. On the other hand cllr's in South Norfolk and Broadland have fought side by side with us and if they need support I will be there doing all I can. What goes around comes around!!

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • ....."The coalition will collapse if the incinerator isn`t cancelled and Nobbs will lose power".....Or.....Nobbs will collapse if the incinerator is cancelled and the coalition loses power.

    Report this comment

    Rhombus

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • Now pull the funding and the status of 'national significance' on the ridiculous Northern Distribution Road and lets get some sanity back into this county.

    Report this comment

    John L Norton

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Martin Willis, you make an excellent point, but papers don’t seem too keen on acting in the public interest by exposing the truth, or understand the need to retain the trust and respect of its readers, to the point one wonders if investigative journalism still exists? Although I do remember an article saying: “your Eastern Daily Press – which provides news that is clear, truthful and unhindered by political interests.” Perhaps the EDP would have the courage of its convictions and take action to show it is part of the free press that is the so-called envy of the world?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Monday, October 21, 2013

  • I say, when is plod going to look into the dodgy dealings that left you little tax payer sorts with a nasty £20million bill? I mean, it's a bit far-fetched to think Borat and others agreed such a ludicrously unbalanced contract through simple incompetence or negligence, what what.

    Report this comment

    Mr Cameron Isaliar

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Well done Elizabeth Truss and Henry Bellingham for standing up for people with common sense. Its quite obvious why you are in power because you listen to people and you know a silly idea when its presented. Have you any tissues for Borrett and all the others who are having a tantrum.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Oh dear Dic.ken.s - council tax won't rise as central government has already capped it. Either you already know this and you're just stirring up trouble as usual or you're not as well versed in politics as you claim you are. Which is it?

    Report this comment

    User Removed

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • Up go the bills for all of Norfolk council tax payers, ouch goes the headache of our waste disposal and all because of a relative minority of mouthy residents and business owners in the King's Lynn area and some local politicians. This was a solution for all of Norfolk, not just for Lynn So when another solution is proposed for another area I suggest residents there make as much fuss as Daubney and co. to serve their own ends. The green pie in the sky merchants are already costing us a fortune on our heating bills, now they are going to cost us a fortune on our waste disposal-all on account of some dodgy science from the IPCC , a few blueberries , and a few council and parliamentary seats. You wait residents of East Norfolk-the fuss will die down and then the plan will be resurrected for Yarmouth and not one of the vociferous green campaigners from West Norfolk will raise a voice objecting to their waste being burned where a town full of migrants wont be " green" NIMBY activists. Now our roads will remain unfixed, services cut and what is more we will be paying tax for landfill-because 100% recycling is a pipe dream . And of course some material will still be going to North Lincolnshire to be burned, just as it does from the much lauded recycling and biomechanical processes in adjacent counties.This is not a victory for local democracy, this is the dark day of a minority of residents influencing and affecting Norfolk county policy in an undemocratic way.

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Thank you KLWIN team and all who contributed time and effort to stop the monster in Norfolk. A massive thank you to Derrick Murphy, thank you for winding the public up as it has had the desired effect by making us scrutinise NCC & CW to the hilt. If we had a leader we could trust, kevingate and all the trimmings we may have not dug as deep.

    Report this comment

    Interpol

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Your bluster is false Daisy Roots, because all of Norfolk was asked in 2000 and 2004 as to what they want for Norfolk. An overwhelming majority of 70+% mandated NCC to reduce waste, to reuse what is reusable and to recycle, all of which has been ignored by the Tory administration. In 2006 they commissioned a survey into landfill mining, when incineration was mentioned and used as a comparison to other methods. Incineration was the least liked option, none of the questioned public liked it, still the councils cabinet went ahead schemeing that we don't notice it. Well, councillors might have been asleep and failed to ask for the democratic discourse they deserved, but the public was not. You can band your accusations of nimbyism around under your pseudonym, but be rest assured, I do not live in west Norfolk and should an incinerator be proposed for your Diss backyard, I will also oppose it as lunacy, because it is behind the times and overtaken by recycling. You are calling Norfolk residents and the 65.000 west Norfolk objectors a minority when minorities run our Government and councils? Todays decision is all about votes, Daisy.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Daisy - Let me put it to you like this: Let's say I offered to buy you a brand new car, and I turned up at your house with a brand new shiny Ford Fiesta. You'd say "oh this is great, this is a brilliant solution to my transport problems". Whereas I could have gone to the dealership and bought a Mondeo for the same price which was an even better solution. The fact you hadn't seen the Mondeo means that you would think you were getting a great deal with the Fiesta.

    Report this comment

    LynnLegend

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • For all you silly little people bleating about the possible cuts that may be required to pay for some speculative costs, put a nought on the end and treble the figure you first thought of to get to the CUTS NCC has already absorbed while DaveCam's Govt ponders how many more of your billions it can bin on HS2. I know it’s complicated but do at least try to put these things into context instead of all the silly scaremongering. LOL

    Report this comment

    Mr Cameron Isaliar

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • That scratchy noise coming from County Hall will be the hasty signing of the RPP then?

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • The anti incinerator mob have now cost us all another 169 million. Even more services will be lost in order to build. Dreadful news for the taxpayer.

    Report this comment

    Ben Dover

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Incineration is not the answer to dealing with waste. There are other alternatives. However much we might like to burn those daisy roots consider the environmental implications, and costs.

    Report this comment

    norfolkngood

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Fenscape-not quite the gist of my argument-which is really that if the incinerator does pop up anywhere else I don't expect anyone in West Norfolk to raise objections to it using the most serious environmental grounds that they have been so concerned with in King's Lynn. I have always felt that the motivation of the campaign there has been not at Saddlebow, regardless of how convincingly they expressed concern about the environmental matters and the cost of the process etc. I am not convinced for a minute that the withdrawal of funding has anything to do with anything but politics-the d*cky contract is a convenient get out-it would have been ignored if there were enough interests in the incinerator in Lynn with influence. By getting out that way, the door is left open for an incinerator elsewhere in Norfolk. I am pro power from waste. pro recycling and reuse but very anti recycling when it is not energy or cost efficient. As such I would be happy to see an efficient power from waste station in East Norfolk, combined perhaps with a biomass burning power plant like the one at Sutton in the Isle.But no waste from West Norfolk thank you.

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Daisy, read the letter!! Someone breached the terms and conditions. That someone was not me or any other opponent of the proposal.

    Report this comment

    Canary Boy

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Bruce87 Can a Council be declared bankrupt? You mean morally bankrupt, I assume?

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Martin Wallis, I believe the case against Defra is larger than that, and they are attempting to deflect the blame: “The review was prompted by a breach in the terms and conditions under which funding was originally agreed. We considered the full range of relevant factors, including the likelihood…” What was the breach in T&C, the lack of consensus, or rather that consensus was made up? If Defra did not examine the full facts before awarding the PFI, bearing in mind the contract was only signed, and therefore compensation payments come into effect, once they were awarded, then surely the full financial consequences should be on Defra? Neil Thornton and John Burns, Jackson & Hull’s two chums at Defra, assisting with the PFI were ‘reshuffled’ somewhere else a few months after. Defra are hardly likely to come clean on anything, they can’t even provide FOIs – yet!

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • letter to the Editor-in-Chief: What's the banner headline today? Not THE LADY IS FOR TURNING that's for sure... How about "MAULED BY DE MAULEY!" ? Defra have withdrawn the PFI award. But this is not over yet. The public has the right to know the full details of how the Tory-dominated NCC Cabinet got the taxpayer into this mucky fuddle in the first place. And the EDP has stated time and again that it's bounden duty is to get to the bottom of murky goings-on and to ensure that the public has the right to know the facts, and to hold politicians to account. "The review was prompted by a breach of the terms and conditions under which funding was originally agreed" (Lord De Mauley's letter). I think we need a little more clarification about this 'breach', and our campaigning, truth-seeking news-hunting EDP will find out, won't you? "Nonetheless, the council is still bound by the contract entered into by the previous administration" says Mr Nobbs. Well, I think the jury's still out on that one. When he first took the editorial helm at the EDP, Nigel Pickover was interviewed in a Q & A session (Saturday September 15 2012): "Q: You're reputed to be a campaigning editor - will the EDP under your editorship be opposing the undemocratic King's Lynn incinerator? (JonahOliver) NP: I will take a long view on this hot topic - our first job is to be fair and balanced. And to be first with all the stories on it" On post-Leveson: "The freedom of your Eastern Daily Press - which provides news that is clear, truthful and unhindered by political interests - is at stake" (leader October 9 2013). And Mr Pickover's predecessor Peter Waters wrote: "Reputation is everything for a newspaper. If the EDP conceded it, it would be difficult to regain. People trust what they read in the EDP" (Monday July 18 2011). This cri de cœur by Mr Waters was illustrated by an image of Jacob Henry Tillett, founding father of the EDP, whose portrait hangs in the office of the Editor-in-Chief. Mr Tillett's good name is at stake here. So now's the time to walk the walk. Unleash Dan 'razor-dodger' Grimmer. Investigative journalisn is not a lost art, is it? Let's be having' yew, Mr Pickover. "The reader expects..." (pace Admiral the Lord Nelson, Norfolk hero)

    Report this comment

    martin wallis

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • After the vast amount of information showing that this incinerator is vastly overpriced, bad technology and will cost the County a fortune the only people who are supporting it must have some ulterior motive that needs to be investigate by plod.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

  • And a huge thank you to John Fuller Tory leader of South Norfolk who wrote identikit letters to the previous Secretary of State with other Tory leaders showing to the new Secretary of State that the so called support from elsewhere in Norfolk was a complete farce. He must have enjoyed reading the conduct complaint against you.

    Report this comment

    alecto

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • Not my post below, I have an IQ over 30. Daisy Roots, a couple of small points – in West Norfolk 65,516 people voted ‘No’ and 66% of Norfolk’s Parish Councils objected – they are not minority figures. Your area, Gt. Yarmouth, has a recycling rate of around 27%, of course you will blame the foreigners to disguise the apathy of the Council officers, because a little time and effort to educate all residents would assist an increase, freeing up a little more money for the rest of Norfolk’s taxpayers from unnecessary landfill charges. Whilst the health and environmental impact of an incinerator at Saddlebow would be strongest here in the west, the prevailing wind would ensure a Norfolk wide coverage. If you had paid any real attention to the campaigners, you would realise we do not support an incinerator anywhere at all, and the financial implications due to a lack of real ‘residual waste’ would affect all Norfolk taxpayers wherever it was sited in the county. Other counties have reduced their landfill charges with 60-70% recycling, and thereby increase money available to fund other services, but NCC do not want to push for greater reduction, reuse or recycling because waste is needed to burn. As for roads remaining unfixed and services cut, that old desperate last gasp scaremongering technique will only work for people too blind to see that it has been happening for years and will happen regardless.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • What the tax dodging Lord and exploiter of Benin? shirley not him. Ms Smith would not consider accepting unethical funding for her election effort, or would she?

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Sunday, October 20, 2013

  • So Ingo-do you think the residents of West Norfolk would be happy with plastic to oil processes at Saddlebow or landfill mining at Setch or Blackborough End, opening up 50 years of stench and decay? How is sending our waste to Holland ( which was dumping waste in the North Sea not so very long ago) a green solution? NCC might have acted improperly in the awarding of a contract but I doubt the agitators in West Norfolk would have raised a peep if it had been a dodgy contract with an expensive alternative solution or cared a bit for anything other than what was meant to be coming out of a chimney and their political hides. Why not hand over control of the whole county budget to Daubney's council, let them sort the roads and other services to their local satisfaction while the rest of us go whistle.

    Report this comment

    Daisy Roots

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • The Tories really have left a poisonous legacy on the council. This is going to lead to a massacre of services.

    Report this comment

    JO

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • yes indeed Canary boy deserves a magnum and so does John Martin, for his essential exchanges and challenges to County Hall's secrecy and underhand practises. I think we should all enjoy a bbevvy over this, bar those who should pay for the compensation. Well said on the BREACH OF THE AGREED TERMS UNDER WHICH FUNDING WAS ORIGINALLY AGREED, Bikerboy, just read the letter, sounds like 'you have shot yourself in the foot, now deal with it'.

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Friday, October 18, 2013

  • I've just checked with my dog, he says you're wrong. We'll stay, you feel free to leave, missing you already.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Saturday, October 19, 2013

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

Most Read

Newsletter Sign Up

Sign up to receive our regular email newsletter

Most Commented

Show Job Lists