Agenda item

Councillor Tierney presented a motion regarding the proposal of an incinerator facility in Wisbech and stated that.

This Council understands that there is a proposal to build an Incinerator Facility in Wisbech.

Incinerators are actually wasteful.  They burn much of what it otherwise recyclable and their demand for fuel can sometimes result in a reduction in recycling due to their need to bid for more and more waste.  This means that it becomes typical for incineration to lead to a reduction in recycling and discourages efforts to preserve resources and creates incentives to generate more waste.

Waste Incineration is not a renewable source of energy.  Incinerator companies are marketing “waste-to-energy” as a source of renewable energy.  But unlike other renewables the fuel does not come from infinite natural processes.  On the contrary, it is source from finite resources. 

Burning waste produces toxic emissions.  Burning waste is hazardous for citizens’ health and the environment. Even the most advanced technologies cannot avoid the release of vast amounts of pollutants that contaminate air, soil and water, and end up entering the food chain. Incinerators are major emitters of carcinogenic pollutants as well tiny particles of dust that can lead to decreased lung function, irregular heartbeat, heart attacks, and premature death.

Burning waste creates less employment opportunities than recycling.  Incinerators offer relatively few jobs when compared to recycling.  The large footprint of a huge Incinerator could clearly produce more jobs as regular manufacturing space.  The idea that the Incinerator is a valuable job creator for local people is bluster.

The World is embracing Zero Waste, and Incineration is a backwards step.  “Waste-to-energy” is often described as a good way to extract energy from resources, but in fact it works against the circular economy, producing toxic waste, air pollution and for those that are concerned about Climate Change - contributing to it. 

Wisbech Roads will be heavily affected.  An Incinerator of the size proposed would create hundreds of additional large lorry journeys daily creating significant additional congestion and wear and tear on already busy roads. 

Wisbech Rail is under threat.  Wisbech’ long held hope to re-open its rail line has been champions by the Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, the local MP and all local Councils.  Millions of pounds have been invested to get to the current point.  The proposed location of the Incinerator limits the potential options for a new rail station and cuts off part of the potential route it could take. 

In 2019, Wisbech Town Council’s motion to oppose the Incinerator project met with nearly unanimous support.  An original local campaign opposing the Incinerator has since been joined by a second Campaign doing the same thing.  Rallies, public meetings and large campaigns are in place.

Many Environmental Groups are opposed to Incineration due to the issues already discussed.  The public are overwhelmingly opposed to the building of an Incinerator in Wisbech.

The Incinerator proposal is of such a large size that it bypasses the usual Planning route through local Councils and instead will be decided directly at Government level.  This means local people and local Councils have very limited opportunities to make their views known.

It is important that local people see that Fenland District Council as an organisation understands the strength of public opinion against the Incinerator and that it is willing to stand up and be counted in the campaign to try and prevent it ever happening.

THIS COUNCIL STATES THAT:

1/  We do not support the construction of an incinerator in Wisbech.

2/  We will write to the Secretary of State to make clear our opposition to these plans.

3/  We will take any and all legal avenues and processes available to us to continue to fight on behalf of the residents of Wisbech, the surrounding villages, and Fenland as a whole and to challenge this unwelcome scheme every step of the way.

Councillor Patrick seconded the motion and Councillor Mrs Mayor opened the motion up for debate.

·         Councillor Boden stated that he hoped that the motion would be passed unanimously. He added that the proposal of the incinerator is deemed as a national infrastructure project, and therefore will be dealt with at a national level, rather than at County Council. Councillor Boden outlined the first stage of the process which commenced in late December 2019, with a deadline of providing feedback to the planning inspectorate of early January. Councillor Boden thanked Councillor Count for working with officers at County Council and at Fenland, to ensure a robust response was provided to the National Planning Inspectorate.

·         Councillor Meekins stated that Wisbech Town Council discussed the incinerator in 2019 and at that time he abstained from the vote, as in his opinion he felt he did not have sufficient information to make a decision; however, as more information is now in the public domain, he will support the campaign to oppose the incinerator.

·         Councillor Sutton stated that he will not be supporting the motion, as he feels he does not have enough information on the proposal.

·         Councillor Booth stated that members need to be kept informed on a stage by stage basis. He added that he is particularly concerned about the dioxins that will be produced.

·         Councillor Lynn stated that any member that does support this motion should be apologising to their parishes.

·         Councillor Mrs Bligh stated that she would like to thank Councillor Tierney for including the villages within the motion, as it will also have an impact on the surrounding villages.  She added it is not just the toxic omissions she has concerns over, but also the impact on the traffic in particular the A47.

·         Councillor Hoy stated that the reason people are lacking information concerning the proposal, is because there has been insufficient information provided.

·         Councillor Cornwell stated that he would like to have seen more information concerning the proposal. He added that the motion is good, but due to the lack of information, he is unsure as to which way to vote.

·         Councillor Yeulett stated he cannot support the motion, due to the lack of information.

·         Councillor Count stated that Peterborough Incinerator is primarily to deal with the waste generated from that area. The Wisbech incinerator proposal is to be built to deal with Norfolk’s waste. He added that this will mean that the waste collection vehicles will be driving across the whole of Norfolk to drive into Cambridgeshire with their waste which is not a very ecological proposal. He stated that in his opinion it is an easy decision to support the motion, as he feels there is sufficient information available. To have an incinerator in Fenland when it is another county’s waste is not a sound prospect. Councillor Count asked for a recorded vote to take place on this item.

·         Councillor Mrs Davis stated that she fully  supports the motion and added that having an incinerator in Wisbech, is not going to reduce the volume of traffic, it is not going to make the people of Fenland healthier, and will be detrimental and therefore the motion should be supported.

·         Councillor Wicks thanked Councillor Count for clarifying some of the missing points and added as it is Norfolk’s waste it should not become a problem for Cambridgeshire.

·         Councillor Patrick stated that there had been a rally held in Wisbech and it had been well attended. One of the speakers who attended had stated that the number of incinerators is increasing and councils will be tied into having to buy rubbish to burn. Councillor Patrick concluded by stating that the proposed location is not suitable, there are residential houses and schools in the vicinity  and the future generations must not have to be impacted by the proposal.

·         Councillor Tierney thanked Councillor Patrick for his comments which he agrees with. Councillor Tierney addressed Councillor Sutton and asked him to reconsider his decision not to support the motion.

A Recorded vote was taken on the Motion.

In Favour: Councillor Benney, Councillor Mrs Bligh, Councillor Boden, Councillor Booth, Councillor Connor, Councillor Cornwell, Councillor Count, Councillor Mrs Davis, Councillor Divine, Councillor Mrs French, Councillor Miss French, Councillor Hay, Councillor Hoy, Councillor Humphrey, Councillor Mrs Laws, Councillor Lynn, Councillor Marks, Councillor Mason, Councillor Maul, Councillor Meekins, Councillor Murphy, Councillor Patrick, Councillor Purser, Councillor Rackley, Councillor Seaton, Councillor Tierney, Councillor Wallwork and Councillor Wicks.

Against: None

Abstentions: Councillor Sutton and Councillor Yeulett.

The motion was adopted.