Wrangle over Norfolk incinerator compensation bill continues

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

Tuesday, July 15, 2014
6:30 AM

The first £11.8m of the bill for scrapping the King’s Lynn incinerator has been paid, but the full cost to the Norfolk taxpayer is still not set in stone.

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

The county council voted by 48 votes to 30 to terminate the contract for the proposed incinerator at Saddlebow at an extraordinary meeting in April.

Council officers had said that, due to delays in securing planning permission, the controversial project no longer offered good value for money, and councillors agreed to ditch it,

In May, the estimated cost of cancelling the contract was put at just over £33.7m, including £20.3m to Cory Wheelabrator - the company which would have built and run the burner; public inquiry costs of £1.6m and estimated interest rate related costs of £11.8m.

That latter cost was paid today, but at a meeting of the county council’s police and resources committee yesterday, deputy leader David Harrison revealed the wrangle over costs continues.

He said there had been months of arguments over the fine details of the contract and how much that means the council must pay Cory Wheelabrator.

Liberal Democrat Mr Harrison, said: “The process has taken two months of arguing and Cory Wheelabrator has now presented a document to us as to what the amount is.

“The process has been extended out until September for a process of due diligence to take place. It is not over yet.”

A spokesman for Norfolk County Council confirmed that the £11.8m was paid yesterday, but that Cory Wheelabrator’s compensation claim would now be subject to due diligence.

In a note sent to councillors, Joel Hull, project director of residual waste services, wrote: “Our specialist advisors, including forensic accountants, are now scrutinising in detail all the evidence submitted by Cory Wheelabrator to justify its compensation claim for up to £20.3m of its total costs.

“Its expenditure is actually higher than this capped figure. Nevertheless, we will request further evidence or reject any part of the compensation claim where required, and now expect that any payment relating to this would be made by September 2 and that any process leading to a payment would have appropriate member involvement throughout.”

The council has created reserves of £33.7m to pay the costs associated with scrapping the incinerator.

What do you think of the incinerator saga? Write, giving full contact details, to Letters Editor, Prospect House, Rouen Road, Norwich NR1 1RE.

28 comments

  • Del Boy.... N.F.N.!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Citizen of EUSSR

    Saturday, July 19, 2014

  • DelBoy can you please explain....if, as according to your insistence, incineration is so safe and efficient, how could it possibly reduce house prices?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Realist

    Saturday, July 19, 2014

  • Del Boy, we all know your nose has been put out of joint, but couldn’t you make your grounds against those who have been working to stop this incinerator a little more plausible? First we are accu.sed of acting politically, but that does not explain why people of all political backgrounds were against it, then we are all Nimbys, but that does not explain why we opposed it on the financial costs to Norfolk’s taxpayer, or why people from across the county have opposed it, now it’s because we want to sell our houses and low and behold up pops Local Yokel to make that point for you. This isn’t about who wins and who loses, everyone has been losing for years, because the focus for the last 10 years has been having an incinerator somewhere in Norfolk, rather than focusing on reducing and recycling waste, which has led to years of unnecessary costs to the taxpayer for disposal. What are the unnecessary disposal costs as a result of Gt Yarmouth’s 26pc recycling? The average of 45pc is disgraceful, but NCC has only been aiming for 50pc by 2020, because they preferred to put the profit into CW’s pockets straight from our own. Why don’t you explain why you are really so against the campaigners?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Honest John

    Thursday, July 17, 2014

  • There are others Fenscape, like Adrian Tyas whose name is never reve.aled, and of course they are all working together, they are all in it up to their necks. Apparently Gibson will be returning to her old post when this new MD eventually gets round to starting, what does that tell you? Someone has been carrying out Gibson’s duties perfectly capably for over a year, she hasn’t been needed, so she should go, surplus to requirement.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Honest John

    Thursday, July 17, 2014

  • Poor old 'D' - still balking at the campaign so lets put things on the level to save us all a week of moaning that his 'right to free speech' is being infringed..... He sent an email to the campaign under a false name several months ago with his own agenda of trying to destabilise the leadership of KLWNBC but he was spotted and ignored - funnily enough this same tactic happened a few months later at local levels but was spotted and thus it fell on it's backside and sank without trace (Daubney resisted the challenge and is still Leader). Since then, our 'friend' D has tried every trick in the book to use the EDP's comments page for his own ends for personal revenge because he was subsequently ignored and written off for the nutter he really is. All the mods need to do is look at the IP addresses for each contributor to discover how sad and silly he is because he continues to post under all sorts of ridiculous usernames.... the thing is, you cant claim a stake to the moral high ground when you've been rumbled and besides, Liz Truss is about to stamp on the Saddlebow plan regardless of whether CW have NCC support or not. Tata old pal...

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Thursday, July 17, 2014

  • Agreed HJ - both Hull and Allen have questions that need answering but this just wont happen when the 'acting' Chief Exec happens to be the old head of HR who seems to be working hand in glove with the head of Law and the Leader too. There will be no transparency at county level while McNeil, Gibson and Nobbs continue to cover each other's backs.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Fenscape 2

    Thursday, July 17, 2014

  • Joel Hull has now been involved in 3 failed attempts for a waste contract in the last decade, it is disgraceful he is still at County Hall, let alone playing a key part in sorting his own mess out. Let’s see some investigative journalism and transparency from County Hall as to which companies these specialist advisors and forensic accountants are from, because the same ones who were involved in the contract should not be entrusted to find ways out of it. So who are they EDP, the taxpayers footing the bill have a right to know?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Honest John

    Wednesday, July 16, 2014

  • As for sanity save that cheap shot for the barmy army called KLWIN. Waste of time and even bigger waste of tax payers money as we now see.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Wednesday, July 16, 2014

  • I haven't 'lost'. I am not in a contest with anyone but I do know that the incinerator is going ahead. Ask your mate Liz. She should know. Good luck with that one.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Wednesday, July 16, 2014

  • Now now, that`s not the way to behave D. You and yours lost (was there ever anyone else in the general public for it?), so get over it. Why don`t you find something else to get your teeth into and leave the saner world alone.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    democrat

    Wednesday, July 16, 2014

  • Talk about small minded. The anti mob can call everyone corrupt, stupid, incompetent and idiotic and money grabbing and useless and more besides but I must not say 'nimby'. How pathetic. There is a world outside that gold fish bowl. Try it sometime. Local.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • Del Boy - you came in here calling everyone against the incinerator a NIMBY & claiming they had ulterior motives. Yet, when you're asked to justify your stance with a reasoned argument, you complain about insults. When you can discuss your point of view in a rational & reasonable manner, you'll be taken seriously. Until then you'll be treated like the troll you work so hard at being. You say "for doing their jobs" - does this mean you're admitting to being part of the administration that was working to get the incinerator? Or are you once again blowing smoke?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • SM Haters chips in and I rest my case. Another perfect example.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • One wonders what the final bill will be for the anti campaigners and their pestering. That crew have cost the rate payers a fortune to date and the anti campaigners bill is still rising. Some might suggest that the rate payers are footing the bill to keep certain peoples house prices high.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Mr A. Schicklgruber

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • Holding up a mirror to yourself, "Del Boy"?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • People come on here and throw a few insults at anyone they fancy calling them names for just doing their jobs and think it is OK. Pity none of this lot have the brains to show us all how it should be done. Armchair leaders.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • Is it too much to hope that those agreeing the compensation will not be the idiots who negotiated the contract.None of them should be allowed to hold public office.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Norfolkman

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • All and sundry can see this lot for what they are. Just look at the comment below; .........."Calm down Del Boy or the men with butterfly nets will be coming to look for you".........What a stupid comment. Speaks volumes for the author. A certain type these campaigners. Take more water with it this early in the day alecto.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • I was a campaigner. Don't live anywhere near West Norfolk. Calm down Del Boy or the men with butterfly nets will be coming to look for you. In any event the whole thing is the fault of the inadequate and intellectually challenged officers and councillors at County.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    alecto

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • So, Del Boy, how exactly did a "few 'local' NIMBYs" "fool a few councilors"? What about their information was incorrect, falsehoods or deliberately left out? How about the long-term expense of the incinerator with compensation clauses if Norfolk didn't supply a minimum amount of waste, while at the same time having to increase recycling under EU rules? What about the withdrawal of the waste credits and their effect on the cost of the contract to Norfolk ratepayers? What evidence do you have that there will be an increase in house sales as a direct result of the incinerator being cancelled? If there are any agendas, it seems to be yours to waste as much of the taxpayers money as possible. How about declaring YOUR interests in it going forward - how much do you stand to gain?

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    So_Many_Haters!

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • Del, people don't want to have to move away from West Norfolk, that's why they didn't want the incinerator built.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    LynnLegend

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • Same the country over. Campaign groups pretending to worry about the environment but really it is all about house prices.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • How many of these 'campaigners' are going to be trying to sell their houses soon? I think we all know what is at the bottom of this.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • A few 'local' nimbys caused so much expense. Norfolk council services ruined by a campaign group with their own little agenda. They managed to fool a few councillors though and a few reporters.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Del Boy

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • @SteadyOn - it would be a far better idea to raise the council tax in the areas of the councillors who voted for the idiotic contract in the first place. That would teach you not to put such halfwits in a position of authority!

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Norfolk and Good

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • Services under threat because of a huge compensation bill caused but councillors and of course the very "local" people of Lynn.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Steady On

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • I think some small council tax rises on the whole are a good idea, protect the services that many rural communities depend on.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    LynnLegend

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

  • I presume council tax bills will be rising in the west Norfolk area? Should do.

    Add your comment | Report this comment

    Steady On

    Tuesday, July 15, 2014

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

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Homes24
Jobs24
Drive24
MyDate24
MyPhotos24
FamilyNotices24
Weddingsite

loading...

Classifieds, browse or search them online now

The Canary magazine
Order your copy of The Canary magazine

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT