Veolia failed in their bid for a landfill site at Rock Common, West Sussex, and they were caught out withholding environmental information in Nottinghamshire.

West Sussex County Council planning committee, at a 3 hour meeting on 10th Feb, refused permission for a new inert landfill site (5.5 million tonnes capacity over 26 years) at Rock Common Quarry near the village of Washington. This was a speculative application by Veolia ES Landfill Ltd working with the landowner Goring Estate. The site is not in the county Waste Plan, and sand extraction was originally permitted on condition of site restoration with a recreational water feature.

The application has been opposed for the last 3 years by Chanctonbury Landfill Action Group (chaired by John Auckland) with support from local businesses, residents and local MP Nick Herbert (the new Conservative Shadow Environment Minister). Two major objections from the Environment Agency focussed on the potential impact on groundwater, and the absence of acceptable flood risk assessment.

In addition it was felt that Veolia’s response relating to air quality, noise, dust and other nuisance effects was sufficiently flawed so that impacts could not be properly assessed. Insufficient detailed revised drawings and plans had been submitted showing repositioned site access and appropriate topographical surveys had not been undertaken.

In an article entitled Washington celebrates as landfill application is refused West SussexToday reports:

Jubilant campaigners are celebrating victory after achieving a landmark victory against a bid to dump rubbish at Rock Common Quarry, Washington, for the next 26 years…For the last three years, the locally-based Chanctonbury Landfill Action Group has fought a constant battle to prevent the unwanted scheme going ahead.

50 campaigners had reportedly travelled to County Hall to make a peaceful protest before the meeting. Afterwards, chairman of the group, John Auckland, said:

I hope that Veolia has the common sense not to appeal. I am very pleased with the outcome and relieved for the people who live in and around Washington.

County councillor Frank Wilkinson, who represents the area, had been unable to speak on the issue for the last three years because he was a cabinet member [editor - not good enough!] said:

I’ve had to keep quiet for three hard, long years, but I am absolutely delighted for the people and Washington that this has been turned down.

Erica Sheward, director of Castle Kitchens – the biggest employer in Washington, expressed her relief at the decision, declaring:

I condemn the whole application. It was a disgrace and pathetic.The decision is a massive relief to everyone. Now we can get on with what we are doing.

This is the way the Horsham News puts it:

Washington has fought off plans for a large landfill site in the village. Today (Tuesday February 10) three years of campaigning paid off after the waste company Veolia Environmental Services was told by West Sussex County Council the plan for a landfill site at Rock Common Quarry was not acceptable.

County councillors shot the application down in a unanimous vote, describing it as ‘flawed’ and with potential ‘catastrophic’ consequences.

The Environment Agency objected to the proposal to dump 5.5 million tons of waste in the quarry, stating the risks were too high.

In a separate development, Veolia and Nottinghamshire county council have come under fire from the Sherwood forest (Rainworth) based People Against Incineration (PAIN) for failing to disclose information requested under the Environmental Information Regulations. Mansfield’s Chad newspaper reports:

An investigation has been launched into why information was withheld from campaigners fighting plans for an incinerator near Rainworth. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has confirmed it will look into complaints by People Against Incineration (PAIN) against Nottinghamshire County Council and waste giant Veolia Environmental Services…the ICO will also investigate a lengthy delay of one year by Veolia in responding to PAIN’s request…and why the company said it would charge up to £125 for further information requests.

In the Mansfield Chad article, Kevin Parker, laughingly described as Veolia’s communications manager, is quoted as saying:

…for every request made by PAIN there is an administrative cost to Veolia Environmental Services and ultimately the local taxpayer.

In reply, a Co-Chair of PAIN Legal and Research Team, Shlomo Dowen, points out:

Veolia are prepared to accept hundreds of millions of pounds of public money – our Council Tax money – for the next three decades, but feel justified charging £125 a question when we want to know how they are spending our money! The worst thing about the situation is that when we ask how our money is being spent, we are told this is commercially confidential and disclosure is not in our interests. When Veolia signed the Waste PFI contracts (worth an estimated £950 million) they took on certain responsibilities normally associated with local authorities, including the requirement to answer Freedom of Information questions (without charging excessive fees) and disclose environmental information upon request. This is the law. Veolia have broken the law (not for the first time) and Veolia have broken faith with the people of Nottinghamshire (also, not for the first time). They should be releasing the information and apologising to us, not defending their illegal activities. I fear there will be more of this to come over the next thirty years.