History of the Waste Plan
Essex County Council's waste strategy is based on a Waste Plan that was created in the 1990s. We have been opposing it from the outset.
1998/1999
Colchester, Chelmsford and Braintree LibDem and Labour councils and LibDem and Labour county councillors led the way a decade ago when they opposed incineration in the Waste Plan. In April 1999, a month after a major anti-incineration rally on the county hall steps the Conservatives agreed to sign the 'Working Together' policy between the county and the districts to recycle and compost 40% by 2004 and 60% by 2007. This is included in the current Waste Plan.
They formed a Waste Consortium of District Councils and commissioned recycling consultants Ecologika to run waste training sessions for councillors and officers, and to complete detailed waste audits and draw up individual district council recycling strategies to reach 60% recycling and composting by 2007.
The Consortium fought the county council at the 1999 Waste Plan inquiry. There were 25,500 objections to incineration in the Waste Plan. Ecologika's economist Robin Murray and waste expert Alan Watson were commissioned to appear for the district councils.
Robin Murray proved that intensive kerbside collections of recyclables with local baling and composting, with no longterm contracts for centralised waste plants would comply with all legislative requirements at two-thirds the price of major centralised facilities with long-term contracts. Alan Watson proved that landfill was not running out and that more landfill had been allocated than was permitted in advance.
2000/2001
Three recycling trials were set up in Essex to test the feasibility of 60% recycling. These included the most successful one, the Mersea area trial of 4,500 households with Mersea Island and small villages on the mainland in the Colchester district. By 2002 the Mersea trial had reached 60% recycling, with over 80% participation and 98% public satisfaction.
After a vociferous anti-incineration campaign the Conservatives took over the county council in 2001 in a landslide election victory. Lord Hanningfield pledged 'no incineration' and promised a referendum if it was proposed. Yet the Conservatives alone rubberstamped the Waste Plan, saying they were legally required to include incineration.
Seven councils and 'an unprecedented number of letters' from the public asked Michael Meacher to call the decision in. It was against the Conservative manifesto and pledges. They were passed to GoEast, whose waste adviser was Essex County Council's Geoff Gardner. He rejected the call-in a week before the consultation period ended.
2002
Paula Whitney and two councillors took ECC to the High Court in March 2002 and proved there is no legal requirement to include incineration in waste plans. Opposition county councillors proposed amending the Waste Plan to exclude incineration from Essex, but it was vetoed by the Conservatives. So incinerators are still permitted on any of the Essex waste sites.
Braintree's Labour council and Chelmsford's LibDem council were the first two councils in the UK to formally adopt the Zero Waste Charter after it was launched at Westminster in June 2002. Chelmsford's Conservative council has not rescinded this and they added a list of amendments to their 2007 MoU [Memorandum of Understanding - part of the formal process for agreeing the waste strategy]. They say they oppose incineration.
In October/November 2002 the War on Waste clear and comprehensive consultation was held. Six MBT[Mechanical Biological Treatment - a mixed waste processing plant]/incineration options were offered with three levels of recycling: 33%, 45% and 60%. None complied with the agreed 'Working Together' policy or the Zero Waste Charter. Campaigners and councillors drew up an alternative 'Option 7' to comply with legislation, the 'Working Together' policy and the Zero Waste Charter.
The consultant agreed to include Option 7 in the consultation and a choice of a 'None' option was included on the website response facility though it did not offer Option 7. Option 7 was only available on street stalls or public meetings, with full consultation documents and amended brochure. Braintree council formally supported Option 7 at a public meeting after a presentation from Simon Aumonier, the War on Waste consultant.
2003
The consultant's 83-page report showed that 76% of respondents opposed all six options for MBT and incineration. 69% supported alternative Option 7 with higher recycling and composting, no MBT or incineration and aiming at Zero Waste by 2020. Twelve out of fifteen parish councils supported Option 7. (The new Colchester coalition council has just adopted Option 7 when it formally opposed the Essex waste strategy.)
The results were not publicised and they have been consistently misrepresented in ECC documents since then. The Consortium, before they had their final meeting, asked that Option 7 be costed out. This was not done. Ecologika's Robin Murray was asked to do a critique of the WoW which was highly critical and suggested a seventh option was needed.
Wheelie bins were brought in to Braintree and Chelmsford against Ecologika's advice, with alternate week collections proposed. This caused huge public opposition and unseated Labour at Braintree and the LibDems at Chelmsford with Conservatives taking control.
2004
The Waste Plan was due for review but this has not happened.
2005/2006
The December 2005 OBC [Outline Business Case] was submitted for the PFI bid just after the 2005 consultation had been completed, but the April 2006 new rulings meant a long delay in the process.
2007
In May, just after major local elections, the PFI OBC was released and caused an uproar because at last it was admitted that the MBT plants would produce SRF [Solid Recovered Fuel] or RDF [Refuse Derived Fuel] to burn, with a 250,000 tpa [tonnes per annum] SRF incinerator placed at Rivenhall 'for modelling purposes'. County opposition groups demanded the promised referendum without success.
Permissions were granted for up to 510,000 tpa waste plants at Rivenhall, one of the PFI sites, and 250,000 tpa MBT and 50,000 tpa AD at Stanway, Colchester, outside the PFI bid. The Basildon site permission for 565,000 tpa was delayed until 2008.
After the SEA [Strategic Environmental Assessment] was completed with out-of-date landfill figures showing shortage of landfill space, ECC extended the current landfill site at Stanway's Belhouse Pit till 2022.
ECC also gave permission for the MBT plant at Stanway Hall Quarry and to landfill 200,000 tpa of MBT residues for 25 years in this new landfill site with normal landfill liners, methane and leachate controls. And extra HGV every two minutes were permitted on the same access road, narrow Warren Lane, which services the current Belhouse Pit via the built-up area of Stanway.
ECC also permitted filling the void after the MBT plant is removed for a further 12 years. So we are not short of landfill space while we raise recycling and composting levels, bring in separate food waste collections and drastically reduce biodegradable waste going to landfill.
In December 2007, the Essex area Joint Waste committees agreed to paying LATS fines instead of setting up foodwaste collections, using bogus calculations for sending food across to Hertfordshire to be invessel-composted.
2005 and 2008 flawed consultations
The last two Essex waste 'consultations' in 2005 and 2008 were widely recognised as misleading, flawed and simplistic. They did not explain what was being planned and contained leading questions to obtain the required responses without sustainable options being offered. Therefore the results are not valid assessments of public opinion.
The 2005 consultation was offered to all Essex residents to apply for with a prize draw with the free Essex County Council magazine. Just over 2,000 were completed, over 150 of which were amended by us to give people another better option; a letter was included complaining about the flawed leaflet. Colchester's MP Bob Russell completed one of these amended leaflets and wrote to the county council compaining about it.
It did not mention MBT residues being burnt which was why they had to do the further 2008 consultation after the Outline Business Case for the PFI bid was released in May 2007.
Although the most recent 2008 consultation simplistic and leading questionnaire was included and went to all households in Essex in the free magazine, less than 4,500 responses were received, which is only about a 1% response rate. It was decorated with butterflies and green fields and neglected to explain what was being proposed, what 'fuel for energy' meant or the huge tonnages and HGV movements they would entail.
Page updated 19/7/09
History of the Waste Plan