Login Register

Government cuts funding support for incinerator

By citizenmike  |  Posted: January 28, 2013

Defra cut funding

Comments (6)

Anti-incinerator campaigners claim that the Government has decided not to put any money towards Gloucestershire's scheme because it isn't needed.
Gloucestershire County Council and waste firm Urbaser Balfour Beatty's £500million burner could be built at Haresfield if given permission.
The council confirmed it would not be receiving any funding from the Department for Farming and Rural Affairs (Defra).
But councillor Stan Waddington, cabinet project champion for the waste project, said: "Funding was withdrawn from many residual waste projects as part of national spending cuts.
"An independent planning inspector has assessed Gloucestershire's plans for dealing with our rubbish and that included looking at capacity issues."

Read more from Gloucester Citizen

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters


  • zerowaster  |  January 29 2013, 2:00PM

    So Stan Waddington says: "An independent planning inspector has assessed Gloucestershire's plans for dealing with our rubbish and that included looking at capacity issues." What he doesn't tell you is that the Inspector had grave concerns about GCC's figures, "I do not consider the figures put forward by GCC to be justified."He insisted that, instead of predicting 150,000 tonnes of household waste per annum, GCC should reduce this to a range between 108,000-145,000tpa. Yet GCC have gone ahead with the Javelin Park project based on their original figure of 150,000 tonnes. Where is their justification for that?

    |   3
  • standishgreen  |  January 29 2013, 12:39PM

    Stan Waddington tells half truths that are so close to lies you cannot tell the difference. PFI was designed to channel private cash to public infrastructure projects. The coalition government withdrew GCC's PFI cash because the UK now has sufficient alternative capacity built or planned to meet the UK's share of the EU landfill diversion targets. The 6 other authorities given the boot, sensibly scrapped their projects. Mark Hawthorne, his partner in crime, assures us £190m will be saved. His contract compared with what exactly? His team failed to forecast the amount of waste arisings even 4 years ahead (2008-2012, out by 25%) and landfill tax charges are unknown beyond the next 2 years. So his savings are based on 25 years of total supposition as to future costs of an existing scenario that was bound to change anyway. It's statistically laughable and environmentally criminal.

    |   4
  • L804XDG  |  January 29 2013, 2:14AM

    just get on and build the bloody thing!

    |   -5
  • TimMessanger  |  January 28 2013, 10:34PM

    PFI we will pay for it for the rest of our lives!

    |   6
  • Lecorche  |  January 28 2013, 5:49PM

    So,Mike: What's going to happen if GCC is not getting the dosh to finance this? Who's going to provide the shortfall? Who's responsible for the millions already spent if the scheme fails? Has GCC dropped into the excrement by signing a contract before planning permission was given? Tories,eh! Can't live with them. Can't shoot 'em.

    |   10
  • Ysedra  |  January 28 2013, 3:32PM

    Terrible grocer's apostrophe there, Michael...

    |   1