NORTH Weald councillors have criticised Essex County Council for not ruling out incineration leaving North Weald airfield as one of six possible sites in Essex for a rubbish burner.
The possibility of incinerators in the county forms part of the Essex and Southend Waste Plan officially adopted last month.
North Weald councillor David Stallan told the Guardian: "I'm very, very disappointed that the incineration option was considered at all. North Weald airfield is inappropriate anyway owing to nearby houses, and burners should not be located anywhere in Essex."
Mr Stallan blamed importing waste from other areas, including Kent and London, as a possible cause of having to resort to incineration.
He said: "It (importing the waste) is part of the problem. I believe if they produce waste they should know how to get rid of it."
North Weald Parish Council chairman Bob Wood supported Mr Stallan's opinion.
He said: "I don't think incineration is a solution. I think central government should be increasing and improving other methods of getting rid of the surplus waste in Essex. In my view, a good start would be to stop the import of waste."
Councillor Anne Grigg said: "I'm opposed to incineration. But selecting North Weald airfield as one of the possible sites is totally wrong. Did they consider the health hazard it poses to nearby residents before deciding on what I believe is an extreme measure?"
And she said the statement issued by county council Conservatives, promising a referendum before incineration ever becomes a reality in Essex, was "misleading".
"I don't think if they decide to go ahead the result of a referendum, if one is held, will matter much. The idea of a referendum making any difference is totally misleading."
Mr Wood, however, thought a referendum could produce the desired result if carried out in the same way as objections to a planning application.
But he added: "If the referendum is held only on the principles involved, then it may not be able to avert the final outcome."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article