Localism in a


National Context Colin Drummond, CEO of Viridor.


With the Coalition Government’s movement towards a policy of ‘localism’ the intention is to create ‘genuine neighbourhood planning’. Local authorities should work closely with their communities using planning responsibilities and powers to decide the provisions of housing and essential infrastructure that they require. The bureaucratic nature of the current planning process has certainly played a large part in obstructing progress of vital waste treatment and recycling facilities. The recycling and waste industry now needs to look to work within the framework being established under the Localism Bill to ensure that the next steps will deliver the means to deal with Britain’s waste efficiently in the long term.


Giving people greater responsibility for what happens in their area includes communities taking responsibility for the waste that they produce and acknowledging that it has to be dealt with. The new planning system proposed by this radical and far-reaching bill needs to deliver the means to deal with the waste that we all produce, and our industry will be looking closely at the detail to ensure the bill does just that.


In Viridor’s experience, proposals for all waste and recycling infrastructure, and particularly with regards to energy from waste (EfW) facilities, community interest and engagement is unpredictable and varies hugely from project to project, even where the facilities proposed are identical. For example, our joint venture with Grundon Waste Management, the Lakeside EfW facility, which is up and running near Heathrow Airport, had less than twenty letters of opposition and went smoothly through planning approval. On the other hand, similar facilities proposed elsewhere, at locations including a site between a cement works and a nuclear power station, isolated quarries and industrial estates, have all seen substantial delays caused by a combination of local politicking, vocal opposition and unnecessary bureaucracy. As with development of any scale, some delay is expected and scrutiny and engagement by communities and those representing them is welcome. However, there is a pressing need for waste recycling and treatment capacity across the UK. Local authorities and UK Governments will be hit hard financially if landfill-diverting waste solutions cannot be delivered. Many areas are facing substantial disposal and treatment capacity shortages and rising landfill tax levels mean average additional


|130| ENVIRONMENT INDUSTRY MAGAZINE


local authority waste disposal bills of £5 million a year (based on landfill tax currently sitting at £48 per tonne, and rising) are not unusual.


Despite our company showing an excellent track record of securing planning consents for recycling and waste facilities over the past few years, improvements to our planning systems are without doubt required. In Viridor’s experience, planning permission for waste management facilities is often blocked by local elected members, who are unprepared to make decisions that they deem could be unpopular with some of their voters, even though such opposition is often from a noisy minority rather than being representative of wider opinion. Such decisions are often made arbitrarily without regard for national, or their own painstakingly developed waste and planning policies. They are also made despite being supported by local planning experts and approved by the Environment Agency, and following close consultation with local communities and stakeholders. This all leads to unnecessary costs both in terms of money and time, as planning applications take an age to reach decision


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180