Up in smoke

Wednesday, 11 November 2009

REVEALED:The battle to stop a second incinerator being built in Enfield

By Nick Tarver

SECRET plans which would have led to another massive waste incinerator in Enfield have been thwarted at the last minute following an 18-month behind-the-scenes battle between seven north London councils.

Enfield was just months away from facing the “absolute nightmare scenario” of being home to two large-scale waste treatment plants, according to two senior councillors who have been bound by a confidentiality agreement until now.

The North London Waste Authority, which disposes of the rubbish of the seven north London boroughs, was on the verge of buying a huge industrial site in Ponders End, as its contract to part-run the Edmonton incinerator – already the largest of its kind in Britain – ends in 2014.

It would have made Enfield the waste capital of south-east England.

The new site would have been used as a large-scale waste treatment plant – possibly another incinerator – which would either dispose of the rubbish of the seven boroughs which are part of the NLWA, or import rubbish from around the country. At the same time the Edmonton incinerator would continue to burn waste, probably under Sita, a private firm which owned 50 per cent of LondonWaste, the company which manages the incinerator.

However, after months of intense lobbying and highly confidential meetings, the NLWA, which owned the other 50 per cent of LondonWaste, completely reversed this decision and has bought total control from Sita.

It is now looking at winding down the incinerator from 2014 and replacing it with more environmentally friendly methods of waste treatment, rather than the current method of burning.

The NLWA is charged with managing the rubbish of six other north London boroughs – Barnet, Haringey, Camden, Hackney, Islington and Waltham Forest.

Michael Lavender, the deputy leader of Enfield Council who is also vice-chairman of NLWA, told the Advertiser that the odds had been stacked against Enfield defeating the Ponders End incinerator plan. He said: “Two months ago, authority was given to the NLWA officers to purchase a Ponders End site for the purpose of putting in a planning application to the Secretary Of State for a new incinerator – it was absolutely horrific.

“If the plan had gone ahead it would have meant Enfield importing the waste for the south-east of England and would have led to massively increased traffic.

“We would also have had the retention of the incinerator at Edmonton, leading to
the degeneration of the eastern corridor. The Lee Valley would be the dumping ground for the south-east. The effect that would have had on eastern Enfield would have been phenomenal.”

According to Mr Lavender and Ertan Hurer, cabinet member for finance who is also on the NLWA committee, problems arose as NLWA’s contract with LondonWaste, in which it owned 50 per cent, was due to finish in 2014. Originally the NLWA did not think it would be able to afford to buy out private company Sita.

Under European procurement laws, the contract could not be extended – it had to be put out to tender, which meant there was a very good chance another private company would outbid NLWA and take over LondonWaste and the incinerator. As NLWA is charged with dealing with the seven boroughs’ waste, they had to find an alternative site which had potential to gain planning permission to allow an additional incinerator – and the only realistic one was in Ponders End.

Mr Hurer said: “It was a nightmare scenario. When we first walked in to the NLWA meeting when this was raised we didn’t know what to expect. But it dawned on us quite quickly that we were being ambushed and set up by the other six local authorities with a proposition that would have been unacceptable to the people of Enfield.

“Our immediate reaction was, ‘how are we going to stop this?’ We looked into taking legal advice to get out of the NLWA. But places like Islington and Camden didn’t want us to leave because that would mean they would have to look after their own waste.

“We were doing this because we genuinely believed that the right solution was to use the Edmonton site.”

Mr Lavender said they challenged the decision every step of the way. “We were just in sabotage mode,” he said. “A month ago we went to an NLWA meeting waiting for another stand-up row with the other authorities. We met the officers and they explained a total change of heart. They said they’d listened to our legal arguments and had spoken to Sita, which had agreed to sell its half of LondonWaste. I was straight on the phone to our chief executive, Rob Leak, and I have never spoken to anyone so happy.”

Clyde Loakes, chairman of the NLWA and also leader of Waltham Forest Council, admitted that the likely place for a new large-scale waste-treatment plant would have been in the Lee Valley area. “We hadn’t firmly committed to any sites, but our list had been scaled down considerably to one or two sites in the Ponders End area,” he said.

“But now we’ve bought the whole of the Edmonton site and there’s capacity there to build while we’re running down the incinerator. We’re looking at new technologies – anaerobic digestion and biological treatment: sources that can give us a resource from waste.”

Enfield North MP Joan Ryan, who last year warned that secret talks were under way regarding a new incinerator in the borough, slammed the council for its secrecy.

“You cannot trust them,” she said. “If they hadn’t kept this all so secret for
so long and criticised me for scaremongering when I opened this up, I would have had a bit more trust in what they are saying.”

Email: nick.tarver@nlhnews.co.uk

---

Be the first to comment using the form below.

Submit your comment below :
Your Name (required) :

Your Email*(required) :

Your Location (required) :

Your Comment (required) :

Maximum Number of characters for this text box is 400.

You have 400 characters remaining for your description...

I agree to the terms and conditions and comment rules (required) :

The North London Press may not publish all comments.
Your comments may be published on any Tindle Newspaper Ltd. media.
*Your email address will not be displayed.

Enter the code as it is shown below (required):