Rupert Dorey address last night's meeting to discuss the incinerator proposals and the alternatives.
INCINERATOR opponents have threatened to use every legal process available to fight the planned energy-from-waste plant.
A consortium of ‘key local residents’ have committed to using their own resources to make a plea to the Royal Court to carry out a judicial review should Sita Guernsey, Suez Environnement’s local subsidiary, be granted planning permission for the plant.
Rupert Dorey is the group’s spokesman and a fighting fund has been established to challenge the planning application when it is officially tabled.
He said other members of the group wished to remain anonymous but had put ‘substantial’ sums into the pot.
‘If planning permission is approved, the first thing we will do is put in a planning objection,’ Mr Dorey said.
‘I cannot say at this stage what the objection would focus on.’
However, Environment, while not wishing to discuss the matter yesterday, has previously said there was no scope to appeal an approved planning application.
Mr Dorey said that was not the group’s only option.
‘If that did not succeed then we have the option of moving on to a judicial review, which has the potential to be an expensive and lengthy process,’ he said.
‘I am representing quite a number of key local residents who also object to the proposal being put in front of us.
‘They have all committed to contributing financially to this challenge.’
If the Royal Court took up the issue it is possible the States could miss the 11 July deadline for signing a contract with Suez, the tender price agreed expires after that date.
Public Services warned yesterday that islanders could pay dearly for the actions of any group intent on scuppering the States’ chosen solution at any cost.
Turn to Page 2
‘If Mr Dorey and his associates are prepared to exhaust every avenue to oppose the States’ chosen solution, that is of course their prerogative and I am sure they can afford to do so,’ Public Services minister Bernard Flouquet said.
‘However it is islanders who ultimately will end up paying the price of the States having to contest legal challenges, and even delaying the project past July could end up costing the island dear. Having made such a major issue about the cost of the proposed facility, I hope they do not lose sight of that.
‘I think they will argue that their whole intention is to save the island millions, and I am sure they are genuine in that. Therefore I hope very much that they do not oppose the plans at any cost.’
Deputy Jan Kuttelwascher has tabled a requete for debate at the end of the month aimed at forcing Public Services to return to the Assembly for final approval before signing the Suez contract.
He said he was aware of the group but was not actively part of it.
‘I know a lot of money has been put together to both put together objections to the Suez proposals at the planning stage, which will be lodged by a well-known advocate, and if that does not work I think a judicial review could be on the cards,’ he said.
Article posted on 10th February, 2010 - 2.30pm
7 Article Comments
Phil old chap.
We have a mutual interest in that we both pay taxes to Guernsey.
That gives me the right to comment.
Otherwise I have nothing at all to say to you.
Report abuse
Stephen
Your having nothing to say speaks volumes i.e. you can’t answer the question.
I must say I do find your reasoning highly amusing – you pay taxes to Guernsey so you have the right to comment. So do many off island clients of the finance industry, yet you and Arnald don’t seem to afford them many rights do you?
Report abuse
There may be a short cut to the legal process.
Why not dive straight into the Human Rights legislation ?
It has been so bent out of recognition from its original 1940’s intentions that there is bound to be a sub-sub article to cover the evil intentions of PSD
Report abuse
I think the overwhelming view of the Guernsey public is that we do not want incineration.
Packaging and waste is set to change and reduce through better recycling methods that are coming online, the quantities of waste that we have today simply won’t be there in future and we will have a redundant incinerator, which we will need to pay for regardless.
How will any of our Deputies today be able to face their public in future after saddling us and our children with such a monster?
We have seen in recent months how the public have opposed the incinerator and the number of alternatives that the people of Guernsey have put forward with supporting evidence and specialist knowledge. It cannot be beyond our Deputies to consult with this collective body of Islanders to decide on a well reasoned acceptable way forward.
Our Deputies need to do the right thing and vote out incineration and concentrate on the alternatives. They are not going to be citicised for doing the right thing.
Report abuse
Good luck to Rupert, hopefully we won’t have to resort to what he’s said, and the government actually do what the MAJORITY want!
Report abuse
To go ahead with this incinerator would be beyond madness.
To claim it is sustainable is pure fantasy.
The only way this incinerator could ever be sustainable would be through legislation to prevent combustible materials being used for any other purpose other than incineration.
As oil prices increase, plastics will become more valuable, if these plastics are recycled the calorific value of the waste will reduce dramatically, even if all wood and paper waste is incinerated the auxillary burners will be required to ensure proper combustion of the mixed waste.
With the increase of the oil price, electricity and gas prices will increase. Wood and paper will become more valuable as a fuel source. This would further reduce the calorific value of the waste requiring more oil or gas for the burners.
We would then be in a position of having to use large quantities of very expensive fuels to incinerate valuable materials.
The only way to avoid this would be to ensure maximum high calorific value materials are available for the incinerator.
How do you do that?
Make recycling illegal, close down companies dealing in recyclable materials, raise taxes to pay for the higher number of unemployed.
Why do you think only a few deputies bother to engage with the anti incinerator loby?
Plausible deniability. “I had no idea this could happen”.
Thats why.
Report abuse
So dus dis meen i carnt eat my rustlas burgas animre, i put all de recyclin plastik in da bin!11
Report abuse