Wealden MP keeps up pressure on ESCC over land raise
10th March, 2010
Wealden MP Charles Hendry wrote to Cllr Matthew Lock, Lead Member for Transport and Environment at East Sussex County Council Sussex County Council showing that the firm who has been contracted to handle waste in the county, sees no reason for any new land raise facilities in the area.
Please find Charles Hendry's e-mail below which was sent on the 9 March.
Dear Matthew,
I had the opportunity to speak to Paul Levett, the Deputy Chief Executive of Veolia recently, about the proposed use of landraise facilities for the management of waste in the County. He emphasised to me that the company has no interest in such approaches to waste management and has since confirmed this to me in writing:
“We are the largest waste management and recycling business in the UK and we are planning to maximise recycling, composting and energy from waste. In Sussex specifically, we are constructing a number of new facilities which will open over the next two years. Beyond that time period, our use of landfill will be minimal and can be served by existing landfill sites.”
Paul has also confirmed the successive landfill tax increases will drive greater and greater recycling rates – wood waste will be used as a fuel, concrete will be crushed and reused and paper, plastics and cans will be separated and recycled, residual waste is likely to be incinerated to produce energy.
Given that Veolia has been awarded a 25 year contract to handle the management of residential waste in the County, and would also be responsible for handling much of the commercial waste, it seems of fundamental importance that they do not believe landraise is necessary, nor would they wish or need to use it, should it be approved.
In such circumstances, it must surely make sense to recognise now that there is no future for landraise in East Sussex and that the plans should be dropped?
In the course of the debate about how best to handle this industrial and commercial waste, there has been much discussion about alternative ways of handling it. Before any decision to proceed with land-raise could be considered, it would clearly be imperative to show that every alternative approach had also been considered fully. I know that you are already aware of the approach that has been suggested by Lord Baker and also the approach that has been suggested by Mr O’Halloran, which is used in Sweden.
I recently had the opportunity to discuss this with a firm of environmental engineers who have looked extensively at the alternative waste management technologies. They would be very willing to come to Sussex to make a presentation on all the different technologies, which would also explain why they consider that approaches such as land-raise are no longer necessary. As they are technology neutral and have no vested interests, I hope you would be agreeable to such a presentation, to be attended by a small group of representatives of the County Council and of the local campaign groups? I have also asked Professor Sue Grimes, who is Professor of Waste Management at Imperial College and one of the country’s foremost experts in these issues, if she would attend such a meeting, as she similarly believes that there is a range of wholly viable alternatives.
I hope this will be possible.
Yours sincerely,
Charles
Charles Hendry
Member of Parliament for Wealden
Shadow Minister for Energy
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
www.charleshendry.com