A MOVE to bring the planned incinerator back to the States again could scupper the current deal, Public Services has warned.
If successful, Jan Kuttelwascher’s requete would instruct Public Services to return to the Assembly before finalising the contract with preferred bidder Suez Environnement.
But the department warned that this was unlikely to happen before the tender price expires in July. It added that the cost of the facility would have to be renegotiated if the States confirmed its decision to go ahead with the plans after the expiry date – that would probably result in the price going up.
Public Services minister Bernard Flouquet (pictured) said the States had overseen the whole procurement process that identified Suez’s tender as the best solution, and approved the company’s selection as preferred bidder.
‘We have been through a rigorous and thorough procurement process,’ he said.
‘The States agreed the requirement for that and the current Assembly approved the selection criteria. After independent, expert evaluation of all the tenders received, members agreed Suez as the preferred bidder.
‘It is up to States members to decide if they want to revisit that decision. However, this requete almost certainly goes much further than that, and if it succeeds we could well return to the States in 2010 with nothing on the table.’
Public Services is currently negotiating the contract with Suez and, in accordance with States procurement procedures, this will not be signed until planning permission has been received for the new facility. The application for that is expected to be submitted in mid- or late-January.
The Environment Department has indicated it is likely to take around four months to consult on and determine the application.
Public Services said the earliest it expected to be able to sign the final contract was June, which means it is unlikely the matter could return to the States before the tender expires.
The department signed a letter of intent with Suez in August, which set the limit on payments prior to the contract being finalised at £3.2m. That would have to be paid if the States overturned its previous decision.
Businessman Rodney Brouard has passionately opposed the plans and offered an alternative to incineration – a Vantage waste processor.
He was delighted that Deputy Kuttelwascher had tabled a requete.
‘Four of the seven signatories for the requete previously voted for the incinerator,’ he said.
‘I know for a fact that several others that voted for the incinerator will also support the requete.’
Deputy Flouquet said: ‘We know what the Suez facility will cost because their proposals have been fully evaluated.
‘Without that independent verification, any claims being made regarding the technical viability or cost of another proposed alternative cannot be substantiated, therefore we cannot comment on them.’
Article posted on 18th December, 2009 - 1.00pm
32 Article Comments
Title should actually read “could sink Suez deal and leave ME with nothing”
Report abuse
Good, I hope this requete does work. I hope Suez sink.
It’s pretty obvious to me that these States members don’t give a bleeding thought to the general public when making decisions.
Report abuse
The Suez technology is out of date. Thats why we here of many similar plants to the one proposed are being closed. Lets at least try to keep up to date and use another option such as Rodney Brouards. Someone somewhere is laughing at the Guernsey States thinking they making money for literally old rope. We must not incinerate or we are just going against the grain of the climate change conference and our own childrens future health. I haven’r even started on the cost!!
Report abuse
Although i’m not sure i agreee with the current plan i also don’t agree with the way the states are going about this.
Anyone who votes for the requete but also voted for proposal before public outcry should quit as they obviously made the wrong decision in the first place and can no longer be trusted.
Rodney Brouard should have spoken up when this was in the planning stages and not once things have been agreed
Report abuse
the man. what do you mean !!!. its never to late to change your mind deputies
Report abuse
J
Does that not mean if the decision is changed then the ones still promoting suez has got it wrong also?
we`d have no deputies left?
yipeeee.
The Man
spot on.
more of Flouquets scare mongering. The guy is priceless, he used the same tone in the original debate.
If some had listened to Dave Jones in the first place then this wouldn`t have been such an issue imo.
Report abuse
What would happen to this 3.2 million if enviroment turned down the plant?
I seem to remember Mr Flouquet telling us if we delay any longer there was a real chance suez will not bother in dealing with us or words to that effect. But now he`s just telling us that the price will go up, so which is it?
or maybe i have missed somthing here?.
Were told shipping our waste off island is wrong but it seems perfectly acceptable to ship out the real nasty stuff thats left over, how would we feel if we were having toxic waste delivered to our shores from another country?
If this incinerator burns so cleanly with no pollution why is it so unethical to ship it to jersey if they want (need) it?
Report abuse
Deputies please wake up.
Guernsey cannot afford this, we are being told we will not be able to maintain our health care due to budget constraints, we desperately need new schools, we have an ageing population to care for, we need a new runway, we need new mental health facilities, we need to overhaul our 0 – 10 tax policy and the finance industry continues to come under attack from Europe and the GFSC announced today a drop in deposits in the Island’s banks of over £4billion in the third quarter of this year with the inevitable effect of reducing those bank’s profits and therefore the Island’s tax take.
Where do the States think this money will come from?
Will we be able to continue to rely on the Goose that lays the golden egg (finance industry) for the next twenty years to pay for the incinerator as well, remember the finance industry in Guernsey is only just over 40 years old.
We should be entering a period of frugality and curbing costly habits, not wasting the tax payer’s money on projects we can ill afford in the current economic climate.
Who in their right mind can possibly commit the Island to a 20+ year contract when the above issues should take priority rather than employing outdated technolgy to solve the disposal of our waste.
Personally, I don’t understand the reluctance of PSD to consider the alternatives.
Report abuse
” we could well return to the States in 2010 with nothing on the table”
Except £93million still in the bank of course
Report abuse
I’m a little bit suspicious of Jersey who are making kind gestures of possibly being in the market to take up to 30,000 tons of our rubbish annually for about ten years.
That suggests to me that they know their incinerator cannot stay ‘alive’ on the amount of rubbish Jersey can generate to feed it.
How does their incinerator compare in size to ours?
Are we going to be scratching around for rubbish to feed it ?
Isn’t the Isle of Man importing rubbish to feed theirs ?
Report abuse
Time for a change all round methinks:
are there any of these so-called politicians any good
By that I mean as speakers for the Islanders.
It seems to me they haven’t clue.
they’re like a ship at sea that lost their rudder.
Report abuse
i am sure they in psd have a tricky job, but i thing mr flouquet is a poor minister with poor ideas and low skills for his job.why didn’t they look into some ideas and tech. before going to tender?whay wasn’t the people’s waste panel listened to?bernie flouquet has been given the head of psd job and dep.chief of the island and he has yet to prove himself deserving of either.sewage is in a state, the roads are closed all the time amd the best rubbish system he has come up with costs 100s of millions, causes stacks of pollution and produces a little power for piles of toxic ash!?who voted for this terrible poilitician?it seems he serves his ends and not the islands.
thanks for your hard work psd, we don’t like your solution though so please go find another.why don’t we ever have mr flouquet and mr trott on the phone in?
Report abuse
Ray
I think you are absolutely right. This is a classic case of how the two islands can work together for mutual benefit. To have two expensive incinerators 25 miles apart, both unable to work financially because of lack of volume, is ludicrous. Let Jersey take our rubbish for the next 10 years. It suits us and it suits them. Then we may well have to look at building our own and taking Jersey’s rubbish for x years to make it viable. Seems a very workable solution. I still think that I prefer the Rodney Brouard option, but the option of shipping our waste to Jersey and sharing the two islands’ identical problem is a close second.
Report abuse
David said ” To have two expensive incinerators 25 miles apart, both unable to work financially because of lack of volume, is ludicrous”.
Sums it all up.
Report abuse
Stephen
And what’s even more ludicrous is Bernard Flouquet’s acknowledgement that Jersey’s invitation to formally discuss this option in 2006 was never subsequently taken up. Surely its the Minister’s obligation to properly consider every available option, especially when the alternative is to commit the island to a massive capital expenditure which it cannot afford. The Jersey option was ruled out far too quickly for my liking. We even own two ships which could potentially be used to transfer the waste to Jersey !
Its the classic opportunity for the two islands to work together to solve a joint problem which is identical and equally vexing for both islands.
The penalty for walking away from the Suez contract at this stage should not concern us if we’d save that amount many times over by walking away. We must not be blinded by the threat of incurring that walkaway cost.
Report abuse
I think the reason why Flouquet didn`t discuss the Jersey option was quite simply because it WAS a good option but one that didn`t fit with what he wanted, which is why everything else put to him just falls on deaf ears.
What i`d like to know is WHY, Although i think i know the answer to that one and so does many others.
Report abuse
bcb
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Many people seem to be of the same view. Are we all wrong ? Is there no smoke without fire ? Questions do need to be asked and properly answered. I’d like to see Flouquet explain fully why the Jersey offer has not been followed up, rather than some wishy-washy answer about preferring to find our our own solution. Our own solution involves the island committing itself to major capital expenditure at a time when we clearly cannot afford, and using a process about which there are so many questionmarks. In that scenario, he needs to come up with a compelling argument for the Suez option, without being blinded by the cost of walking away from that contract. Based on a capital cost of £93m, the interest costs in year 1 alone would come to more than the cost of paying Suez to go away, so that’s a no-brainer.
Report abuse
Would it not be nice to have t shirts, printed with “i send my crap to the crapos” and dustbins saying destined for Jersey.
The serious side of it, is as some have commented.
Why have two incinerators 25 miles apart?
Another question is why has not our arrogant Bernie ( who should be given the order of the bolt and suggestions sent to him)at least have talked to his Jersey counterpart?
Why is our recycling at a pathetic 35%, when it should be around the 60%?
Report abuse
Jersey is a complete no-brainer. All of BF’s comments about why we could not do that are a nonsense because it does not suit his agenda. Why is he so wedded to Suez?
Shipping to Jersey does not contravene the Proximity Principle – that is about making sure rich countries don’t dump their waste on poor countries thousands of miles away. He does not know what he is talking about.
Please find a scrap of orange ribbon/plastic/woo/whatever and tie it to your car aerial to tell deputies to rethink.
Report abuse
Edguet and Altair
We are all completely on the same wavelength here. The Jersey option unquestionably needs to be considered directly alongside the RB alternative and the Suez position needs to be put on hold.
But the full research and debate into the Jersey and RB options need to happen NOW, so that the Suez contract does not happen by default, playing right into BF’s hands.
Its time for common sense to prevail for once.
Report abuse
A.J.
Much has been said, and repeated, regarding decisions by some of our top politicians.Whilst I agree with most of the criticisms,the time will soon come when we will have a chance to put this right at the next election, by stepping forward ourselves and replacing these arrogant, pompous,idiots with ourselves. We are of course intelligent,honest,hardworking,modest and experienced in life and business,so it,s down to us.Bring it on my friends.
Report abuse
The Jersey option has always made sense to me too. I fear though that we are too late and that we are too far down the Suez route to stop it – like a juggernaut at 50mph about to crash into a line of traffic that is directly in its path only 10 metres away. The contract is due to be signed in the next two or three weeks. Can we really put the brakes on now?
Report abuse
Martino
Yes we can, provided that our relevant politicians are prepared to make an effort and aren’t too committed, for whatever reason, to the Suez contract. I’m not in favour of wasting £3.2m or whatever it might cost to walk away from Suez, but I’ms about 30 times less in favour of committing to a £92m contract which will unnecessarily stretch the island’s delicate finances when there are potentially far better options available (and have been for some time).
Its nothing short of scandalous that Flouquet has not properly explored the Jersey option. I think we need to know exactly why that is.
Report abuse
No one has commented on the idea of filling the Ronez Les Vardes quarry which should take about twenty plus years to complete
I know landfill is supposed to be taboo in modern day thinking but is filling a 200 foot deep granite quarry the same as filling a shallow green field valley site ?
Report abuse
Ray
On this forum I have put the Les Vardes option forward a number of times! Not on this thread mind you.
Without doubt there are a number of far more sensible and cost effective options than Bernie’s monster.
And I agree with David and others that we need to know why PSD (Bernie) is so keen on the Suez path with the exclusion of all else.
Either they are all very stupid or……
Report abuse
We have some of the best legal minds in the world in Guernsey, surely someone is capable of taking a look at the content of the Letter of Intent, after all that is all it is, intent, not a committment.
Is this more scaremongering on Bernie’s part?
Report abuse
Guern
It was my understanding that an LOI was non-legally binding.
But then only our bernie, PSD and our states could manage to create the worlds first legally binding one ;)
Report abuse
Martino…
We are not too late. The Suez proposal has to go through planning which will most likely happen in January (depending on the outcome of the requette). It appears that PSD have been busy crossing all the t’s and dotting all the i’s to make sure that it will sail through planning uncontested. However, they cannot stop us all from writing in with our concerns and if there enough planning complaints from the general public, they will have to stop it.
We should also all be lobbying our Deputies to make sure the requette goes through, because then we might be able to stop Suez before it even gets to the planning stage.
Ray.
Filling the quarry would be fine provided we first removed the biological element, which is the part of the rubbish that rots in landfill causing methane, ( a very potent greenhouse gas). Without the methane, landfill becomes a much more acceptable form of waste disposal, particularly if all recyclates have been removed from the waste steam too. The quarry would then last for decades.
Don’t forget your orange ribbons…. a very visible way to show your opinion!
Report abuse
Hi rosie, thanks for that. I suppose I’ve been off the case since the last requete was chucked out. The States have never turned back this far down the road before, which is why I said what I said, but let’s hope you’re right and that the future is orange!
Report abuse
Let us hope that the States do not turn out to be lemons instead!
Report abuse
As was said by a chap I believe from Alderney…… It’s never too late to make the right decision. Let’s hope the Deputies see that. Ploughing on with a wrong decision because of some strange notion of saving face would be such a poor outcome and totally self defeating as the Suez proposal would show Guernsey in such a bad light.
Report abuse
Well done Deputy Jan Kuttelwascher! Finally we have a deputy who stands up for the people on this island. This requete must succeed so deputies…. do the right thing and vote for it!
Report abuse