A MEETING between Surrey
County Council and the Capel Action
Group was to air pros and cons of incineration but as NICOLA RIDER
reports, each group was not happy with the other’s claims
COUNTY
officials have voiced disappointment over claims they are doggedly persisting
with the introduction of incineration in Surrey.
Surrey County Council's, environment
and economy select committee had invited the Capel Action Group (CAG) to make
representations to it last week.
The CAG was set up to try to stop the introduction of an incinerator in the village. Following a two-day meeting, the committee said they were disappointed by claims made by members of CAG that the council was ignoring other options available instead of incineration.
Surrey County Council say CAG’s claims have been refuted by independent
experts and committee members because there is no referenced evidence to
support them.
Marian Myland, chair of the select
committee, said: 'This issue of Surrey's rubbish and how we deal with it is
both important and emotive. We accepted
that people had strong views on it, which is why we organised a special meeting
to allow everybody to put their points of view.
This was
an opportunity to put forward all the fact-based evidence on the pros and cons
associated with various means of waste management, including energy from waste.
'Unfortunately
the evidence presented by CAG was opinion-based and was not referenced to any
formal environmental studies.
This is an
issue which demands a rational approach.
We understand that people have opinions and we are committed to
considering these at all stages, but we cannot do anything, with speculation.
'We do
however welcome genuine evidence from all parties and will continue to do so.
'Councillors
are independent members, here to hear all evidence from various parties and we
need to see clear evidence to convince us to support any particular view.
'If CAG can find hard evidence referenced to proper environmental studies, we would welcome them back at the select committee to investigate these.’ But a CAG spokesman said they are “angry” their claims are not being taken seriously. In a statement, the group said: "Almost seven years have passed since the county council entered into its long-term waste contract. That contract has simply not delivered.
|
“If CAG can find hard evidence referenced to proper environmental studies,
we would welcome them back” -
Marian Myland Chair, select committee |
"The
county council goes out of its way to promote the theory that. incineration
will bring an acceptable solution to dealing with the county's waste, when
repeatedly the public show that that will not be acceptable. Alternatives to mass-burn incineration are
greatly in evidence on the mainland of Europe.'
Another
two-day meeting of the environment and economy select committee will be held on
Monday and Tuesday next week to discuss the next stage of dealing with Surrey's
waste.
The waste plan will be open to
public consultation during the summer and CAG plans to hold a public meeting on
Wednesday May 24 at 8pm, when executive member for the environment David Munro
will answer questions put by the public.
Surrey County Council answers the claims ·
CLAIM According to the Capel Action Group, incineration would
prevent Surrey recycling 80 per cent of its waste ·
SCC REPLIES CAG now recognises this is not possible and praised
Surrey's 60 per cent target ·
CLAIM Surrey County Council’s pursuit of incinerators is a
matter of dogged persistence ·
SCC REPLIES Incineration was chosen after two years of independent
research into waste treatments ·
CLAIM CAG claims Surrey's plans are led by disposing of waste ·
SCC REPLIES The council's waste strategy focuses on recycling with
plans to invest millions into recycling facilities ·
CLAIM CAG claims incineration produces dangerous toxins ·
SCC REPLIES Research shows incinerator plants strip toxins and release
water vapour |