Waste could yet become a crisis
Thursday 11th March 2010, 2:30PM GMT.
A VOCAL critic of this newspaper’s view that the current consensus model of government is largely unfit for purpose rang yesterday and wondered as a senior States member whether there was, after all, something to be said for executive government.
Anyone looking in on the grotesque scene unfolding – and that surely includes Suez Environnement and any other external contractor thinking of doing business here – will similarly be wondering whether the island has a functioning administration or not.
What is clear from the current muddle is that if the States of Guernsey had a crisis on its hands, it could not cope with it. Leadership and decision-making would swiftly be hived off to the Emergency Powers Authority because the legislation underpinning it recognises that a committee of 47 is incapable of acting swiftly or rationally enough to steer the island through difficult times.
While waste disposal is not strictly speaking a crisis, it has the potential to become one, yet deputies lurch from one position to another and there was even talk yesterday that the seven States members behind the requete trying to reinstate the Suez incinerator were having second thoughts and might withdraw.
While that was denied, other deputies were saying that the seven were coming under a great deal of hostile public pressure to back down.
Where, one wonders, will that leave the politicians on Environment, who are popularly regarded as now holding the fate of incineration in their hands now that they can apparently ignore legal advice and vote how they choose?
Whether dumping incineration at this late stage will ultimately prove to have been the right decision or a complete disaster is almost starting to become a side issue. Islanders have long been critical of the States and there are many reasons why this Assembly now has a good chance of claiming the title of ‘worst ever’.
The clincher, however, will surely be what happens next.
After the Lowe amendment led to the rejection of incineration, States members rallied by 38 votes to two behind the indistinct, undefined and uncosted ‘alternative’ of waste minimisation.
If they are now going to tell islanders that that commitment was bogus, we really do have a crisis.
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
You say “If they are now going to tell islanders that that commitment was bogus, we really do have a crisis”
The blame for this lies four square with Tony Spruce, who himself voted for the unified approach, by the States and then a day or so later changes his mind.
What is interesting is that all but one of those supporting the requete are in their first and last terms in the States.
The words set up, over the trenches and cannon fodder come to mind!!!
Report abuse
Stephen,
Thank you for posting under this thread, which drew my attention to today’s GP Opinion column, which I very rarely read these days having become bored a few weeks ago with the fact that it has usually said the same thing every day for the past 10 years: that the editor wants an end to our system of government by committees and consensus.
I see from what he writes today that he still thinks that consensus government is the opposite of executive government, which plainly is not the case. When he castigates ‘consensus’, in effect what he’s promoting is a party political system for Guernsey.
And he still seems to think that protracted decision-making and the capacity of ‘backbench’ politicians to require matters to be debated without reference to the ‘corporate centre’ of government would not be possible under an executive system, which again plainly is not the case.
And the ‘committee of 47’ comment demonstrates that he is still confused by the distinction between a parliament of 47 [the States of Deliberation] and the executive functions of government [five-man boards of departments and committees].
But the strangest section of the article above reads: “Whether dumping incineration at this late stage will ultimately prove to have been the right decision or a complete disaster is almost starting to become a side issue.”
I know from experience that this is an example of journalistic displacement activity aimed at ameliorating one’s readership. Clearly, the editor is desperate not to be forced into taking a view for or against mass burn incineration because he knows that doing either would alienate a considerable portion of his readership. Therefore, far easier to shift the argument onto the comfortable territory of bashing Guernsey’s system of government by committees and consensus, to which very few readers are likely to object, and which in any event seems to have become an obsession of GP editorials.
Rarely has there been a more controversial political issue in Guernsey than mass burn incineration. It has engaged many thousands of people who are usually quite disinterested in politics. It has rumbled on for years, and become particularly intense over the past few months, understandably occupying a great deal of space in the GP news pages. And yet, in all this time and despite the title ‘opinion’ appearing at the head of this column every day, has anyone been able to discern whether the opinion of the editor is that Guernsey should or should not build a mass burn incinerator?
I don’t think so. He’s not just sitting on the fence; he’s creosoting it while he’s up there. Fortunately, States members do not enjoy this luxury of journalism – of never being held publicly to account for one’s opinions.
Mind you, it’s healthy that the Press challenges politicians, of course. When I was a journalist, I had a sign on my desk which read: “The day you write to please everyone, you are no longer in journalism, you are in show business”. The relationship between politics and the press should be a bit edgy, I guess. Just as long as one doesn’t take tabloid journalism too seriously…
Report abuse
http://www.slideshare.net/Chastiya/cfakepathminority-report-on-solid-waste-management
Deputy David de Lisle
We need to build on the success of the past years and continue along the road to reduce-reuse-recycle, a waste miimisation/zero waste stratggy as an alternative waste strategy to landfill and incineration.
We need to emphasize strengthening producer or supplier responsibility to ensure all packaging is recyclable, and build on efforts to minimise waste and maximise recovery, thereby changing our ways so that we
produce far less waste in the first place and make a major shift from disposal to
re-use and recovery.
Incineration:
• produces fly ash which is undisputedly toxic, containing pollutants such as
heavy metals and dioxins.
• is a much more capital intensive and costly approach than recycling
• creates more noise and traffic. Incinerators can also be regarded as eyesores.
Enviros made the point very clearly in their report that there could be
considerable resistance to incineration and that the States of Guernsey should
consult with the people first over the environmental impacts and plant emissions
and residuals.
Shipping waste off island has been
suggested again on an interim basis which if implemented would give time to
reduce our waste stream even further, to promote on-island separation, recycling
and composting and evaluate the longer term.
Guernsey is in a unique position as it has only just embarked on a course of
developing its waste management policy. Let us build on the success in
recycling and begin to eliminate waste at source and progress along the path
towards the truly sustainable goal of zero waste. Incineration only creates waste
and impedes entrepreneurs, businesses, governments from innovations in waste
prevention, reuse, recycling and composting.
Let the island of Guernsey be truly green and an example for others to follow.
Why burn our resources and finance ‘has been’ policies and old technologies.
Let us lead by example and give our children a heritage in sound economic and
environmental management and let us leave something that they can truly build
on so that they inherit the very best of what we have to offer today for an even
better tomorrow.
7.0 Recommendations
7.1 Adopt a Zero Waste policy and set a target of zero waste for all household and
commercial waste in the island by 2020 (50% recycling by 2010, 75% by 2015);
7.2 Channel energies into resource recovery, intensive waste segregation, recycling
and composting;
7.3 Abandon any notion of mass burn EfW incineration or MBT coupled to EfW plant;
7.4 Require source separation for all generators of waste and all waste materials;
7.5 Procure a permanent materials recycling facility (MRF) immediately to handle
household and commercial recyclable materials;
7.6 Supplement home composting with doorstep collection of organic waste and
procure an in-vessel compost plant immediately to focus on garden and
horticultural materials, food waste and organic materials;
7.7 Establish a permanent waste management facility site and civic amenity sites
without further delay to handle the sorting of mixed waste, recyclables,
household and commercial, organics, reuse, wood, metal and regulated
materials;
7.8 Introduce island wide commercial collection of recyclables;
7.9 Introduce permanent kerbside collections of wet and dry recyclables and
reusable and repairable products to every household without delay;
7.10 Introduce strong regulatory control to minimize or reduce the waste generated in
the first place;
7.11 Open up waste planning to greater public participation, education and promotion;
7.12 Use landfill charges to fund zero waste programme.
Report abuse