Leading islanders ‘cannot be ignored’
Wednesday 29th July 2009, 11:30AM BST.
A scale model of Public Services’ proposed waste plant, which is on display in the Royal Court building. (Picture by Peter Frankland, 0815277)
DEPUTIES cannot ignore the calibre of people who signed an open letter calling for the States to delay a decision on how the island should deal with its waste, according to Deputy Dave Jones.
He placed a sursis that seeks to postpone making a decision on the planned £93.5m. mass-burn incinerator. He said the quality of people who put their names to a full-page letter that appeared in yesterday’s Guernsey Press could not be understated.
He welcomed the document, signed by 24 island figureheads, calling for deputies to support the sursis.
‘This letter was not from the usual suspects,’ he said. ‘These are people who have experience of running companies that deal with millions of pounds every year. These are serious people and their calibre cannot be ignored.
‘We often go to them for advice on all sorts of things and we do that because we believe their opinion counts.’
Healthspan chairman Derek Coates, Ozannes partner Advocate Rob Shepherd, architect Jamie Falla, and Chamber of Commerce president Paul Luxon were among those to sign.
Another, Specsavers co-founder Dame Mary Perkins, said she signed it to ask the deputies not to rush into spending such a huge sum of taxpayers’ money without first considering other options.
‘I realise this has been discussed and investigated for at least the last 10 years, but now it appears everything is being done too quickly.
‘I personally favour using the spare capacity in Jersey for a while, plus stepping up recycling.’
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Clearly the people mentioned are well respected business people whose views are welcome and important, however I hope this doesn’t mean that the views of the “ordinary” person will rank lower than these figureheads?
After all we all have the ability to consider a situation, reason, form an opinion and profess that opinion, albeit some in a more reasoned and mature way than others – notwithstanding the recognition that any opinion is an opinion.
Report abuse
I fail to see how “calibre” comes into it. So your telling me that unless I run a successful business or am head of a corporate machine that my opinion is less valued then others that are? Seems like snobbery for 1, and a bit old boyish for 2.
Nice to know what you really think of the “little people” Dep Jones. Good work!
Report abuse
Golden, I agree with your sentiments, I have never heard of most of these so called ‘Leading islanders’ and lets be honest how many actually do care about the normal Guernsey man and women in the street…..They were/are supporters of G-CAN/RA incineration proposal and nothing more.
Report abuse
You should know by now-Golden Brown; that the little people, that is those poor sods who have no chance of being rich, but are good for fighting for likes of those who try at every twist and turn to belittle them-
They die every week, to save the worthless bodies of those who think of them as being of no consequence.
It should be remembered that it was Guernsey people who made Guernsey.
Report abuse
I assume Dep Jones was actually trying to rebut the criticism that protesters are the “usual suspects” since that phrase had been bandied about rather insultingly by PSD i recall. Dep Jones may have his foot dangerously close to his mouth on occasion but he picked up the mood of islanders. This one-page advert was not part of the Rational Alternative campaign, did not suggest that RA had a perfect solution and was signed by a diverse group of people who could not be said to have any great vested interest or indeed for the most part any great experise in the technology issues. Let’s ignore Dep Jones’ comments and just consider the fact that the issue has brought all sorts of people into the fray. In a democracy we all have an equal voice but that is not the same as an “opinion”. PSD is referring always to “expert opinion” since that is what we rationally should base our decisions on. In the absence of subject matter expertise I however will still give weight to the opinion of someone who has had to make a decision about spending a large chunk of his own money on a venture whose outcome is not certain and the success or failure of which will make him richer or poorer. If that person has an opinion on how the States should approach a similar decision then I do not think it is a million miles away from the sort of decision he or she is called to make every day. Put it another way, if PSD put all the civil servants who had slaved over this for the last few years into a room and said “Here’s a big chest full of gold coins – it’s all we have but go and find the best solution for Guernsey. When you have bought it with this gold you can divide what is left amongst yourselves and be rich beyond your dreams but you have to wait until you retire before you get it since we will ask the people of Guernsey then to tell us if they are happy with what you decide today.” Well, they dont’t work that way in the civil service but if ever you watched Sir Alan Sugar castigate his hapless apprentices for buying stock at the wrong price you will get the point – a lot of people think PSD is buying at the wrong price irrespective of whether it is buying the right stuff.
Report abuse
can anyone tell me what the cost would have been for a waste plant\incinerator if deputy ogier and his allies had failed to block it last time?
seems to me this deputy has cost the island millions. cant understand why you guys are getting upset about business people and “people of calibre” interfering in states business its always been like that. A lot of these folks are “old money”, remenber it’s better to be lucky than good.
Report abuse
Kevin
The answer is that Scott Ogier, together with his political allies of 2004 and the anti-incinerator campaigners of five years ago (myself included) did actually save the island tens of millions (compared with the current cost of the Suez plant) by blocking the Lurgi plant.
You have to remember that a Lurgi size incinerator (70,000 tonnes) now would have cost us far in excess of the Suez plant. Add to that the amount of extra rubbish Lurgi would have been burning and you can see that the environmental cost of Lurgi would also have been far, far greater than Suez.
I may be sounding like a Suez supporter but I’m not. I’m merely giving Scott due recognition for his past efforts. For me the tragedy is that we are saddled with a 20th century, not very environmentally-friendly solution to our wast needs for the next three decades – another few years of landfill followed by 25 years of mass burn incineration with a modicum of recycling.
I think Deputy Jan Kuttlewascher summed it up perfectly when he said we are now tied to tail-end waste treatment technology for the next 30 years. It’s such a shame.
Report abuse
I dont really think D Jones meant it in the way some think, i think he was talking more from a business point of view, where they may think there is more to look at. I was no fan of Mr Jones but i cant help feel he is more for the working man and the Guernsey way of life than most other politicians including the local ones.
Report abuse
martino
you must be a politician. you haven’t answered the question i posed at all. the environmental issues are a cost granted but i was talking pounds shillings and pence. In financial terms what was the cost of Lurgi compared to Suez?
Report abuse
Sorry I don’t know the exact answer Kevin – there, a politician would never say that!
I did hear Scott Ogier’s speeches in the States, though, and he gave some figures that seemed to make sense. If you take the Lurgi price of five years ago and convert them to today’s costs (or if you take the Suez price of today and work back what it would have been five years ago) it’s clear that Lurgi was/is/would be significantly more expensive.
I don’t remember the figures Scott gave and the math isn’t my strong point but I for one am convinced that Lurgi would have worked out much worse in every respect.
Report abuse