Lib Dems stand firm on Surrey Waste Plan

The Liberal Democrat group on Surrey County Council rejected the Surrey Waste Plan when it was presented at a recent full council meeting. The group stood firmly by its position from last Autumn that the Waste Plan was a "flawed" document. Only the 10 Liberal Democrat councillors at the meeting voted against the recommendation that the Waste Plan - which sets out the County's position on suitable sites for waste treatment - should be sent forward for consideration by the government.

Commenting on the vote, Lib Dem environment spokesperson Cllr Sarah Di Caprio (Guildford South East) said it was disappointing only the Lib Dems had stood out against this plan. "We proposed a motion back in September 2005 that the Surrey Waste Plan be rejected as a flawed document because it was too skewed towards one technology (incineration) and gives a preferred site (Capel). Two of our group have studied the Waste Plan in great detail as members of the Environment Select Committee and as far as we can see there has been very little change to it after going out to consultation."

The County has maintained the Plan is "technologically neutral", a claim which the Lib Dems refute. Said Cllr Di Caprio "I don't see how this plan can be technologically neutral when policy WD5 specifically refers to Thermal Treatment. Also, the County has insisted on continuing to include its Waste Policy Statement which was adopted in November 2004 and says "we consider energy from waste via incineration ...... as the most practicable, financially viable and sustainable approach presently available for the residual part [of the waste]."

The County's response to concerns raised by the Lib Dems and the public in the recent consultation period has been to move this Policy Statement from the main body of the Plan and into an appendix. "It is hard to believe", continued Cllr Di Caprio, "that companies specialising in residual waste treatments other than incineration are going to come forward with a planning application when this still seems to be the County's view."