When I was a little girl, one of my best toys ever was a red scooter, which I bought at a jumble sale.
I was reminded of this scooter on Monday afternoon because I went to the United Downs household recycling centre. Cars queued up for people to leave their discarded household items while two employees asked us survey questions and several others helped organise who parked and left their items where.
There are lots of ways to recycle useable items - car boot sales, charity shops, e-bay, small ads, jumble and garage sales - all in use in Cornwall.
Do SITA really need to do a survey to establish that Truro, as the fourth largest residential settlement in Cornwall, also needs its own household recycling centre? Otherwise its a ten mile round trip to United Downs.
Did I hear at some stage that SITA's contract with Cornwall Council gives the Company exclusive rights to the household waste it collects in Cornwall? As the cars queued, I was paused by a roadsign saying '60 per cent recycled'. As the SITA newsletters say, that is probably a bigger percentage than before. But it is 60 per cent of items brought to this household recycling point. None of the black bag waste gets recycled. Do they calculate what proportion of all household waste gets recycled through kerbside recycling collections as well as household amenity sites? And if so, please will they add that to the information in their newsletters.
Like many people, two of the reasons why I consistently oppose a centralised incinerator are that it would reduce recycling and increase the local miles that Cornwall's black bag waste travels.
And I agree with Councillor Andrew Wallis that creating opportunities for people to re-use items locally that have been taken by others to the household amenity sites makes environmental and social sense.
I can still remember waiting for that second hand red scooter to be reduced from 15 shillings to seven shillings and sixpence (37.5 pence) at the end of the jumble sale, so that I could buy it with my pocket money, and the many hours I spent playing on it.
Showing posts with label sustainability. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sustainability. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
A burning issue revisited
Today the Cornwall Council waste strategy panel met to decide whether to ask their contracted waste company SITA to submit revised plans for an incinerator. SITA's previous incinerator plan was rejected by the Council's planning committee before the local elections last year. SITA appealed against this decision. There will now be a public enquiry in March, followed by a decision by the secretary of state after the latest possible date for a general election.
It was the Liberal Democrat Cornwall County Council elected in 2005 who chose incineration as their preferred approach and contracted with SITA. The comments on today's meeting to a local newspaper by Matthew Taylor MP would be comical if it weren't for the fact that - for financial as well as environmental reasons - practical decisions need to be made. Conveniently ignoring that it was a Liberal Democrat Council that agreed the contract with SITA, Matthew Taylor MP was the first to throw stones in the glass house: "The Conservatives opposed the incinerator to get elected, but now they are in charge they are about to double-cross electors and back the incinerator."
The fact is that the panel of five Tories, four Liberal Democrats, four Independents, and one MK councillor today decided a recommendation that will go to the Council's Cabinet. The majority backed incineration as an approach by recommending SITA develop a revised proposal.
The argument about Cornwall's waste strategy has run through three Councils and (so far) two general elections. It is fair to say that the issue is not Party political, in that representatives of the three main Parties have spoken for and against incineration in different representative roles, where there are different local factors to take into consideration, and at different stages of the process; for Labour, the only government view is that the chosen approach to waste management should be a local decision. And if anyone failed to deliver that, it was the Liberal Democrats.
I agree with Matthew Taylor MP that "Other communities are developing better, more environmental options for dealing with waste." Like him, I have consistently supported objections to his Party's original choice of incineration and at every subsequent decision stage; and the political boundary changes have not weakened the opposition of my constituency Labour Party to a single, centralised incinerator.
The Liberal Democrats dug the Council into a hole by supporting incineration and then allowing SITA to submit a plan that was refused planning permission. Financially, today's meeting may start to move the Council into a more manageable position and make it more likely that costs can be stopped from escalating.
For Cornwall's environment and carbon emissions it is still the wrong decision, caused by the Liberal Democrats who could have stopped the incinerator many of their supporters oppose when they were elected five years ago, and by now delivered a sustainable waste strategy for Cornwall. And fortunately, it may still be possible to do that, provided a single, centralised incinerator can be stopped.
It was the Liberal Democrat Cornwall County Council elected in 2005 who chose incineration as their preferred approach and contracted with SITA. The comments on today's meeting to a local newspaper by Matthew Taylor MP would be comical if it weren't for the fact that - for financial as well as environmental reasons - practical decisions need to be made. Conveniently ignoring that it was a Liberal Democrat Council that agreed the contract with SITA, Matthew Taylor MP was the first to throw stones in the glass house: "The Conservatives opposed the incinerator to get elected, but now they are in charge they are about to double-cross electors and back the incinerator."
The fact is that the panel of five Tories, four Liberal Democrats, four Independents, and one MK councillor today decided a recommendation that will go to the Council's Cabinet. The majority backed incineration as an approach by recommending SITA develop a revised proposal.
The argument about Cornwall's waste strategy has run through three Councils and (so far) two general elections. It is fair to say that the issue is not Party political, in that representatives of the three main Parties have spoken for and against incineration in different representative roles, where there are different local factors to take into consideration, and at different stages of the process; for Labour, the only government view is that the chosen approach to waste management should be a local decision. And if anyone failed to deliver that, it was the Liberal Democrats.
I agree with Matthew Taylor MP that "Other communities are developing better, more environmental options for dealing with waste." Like him, I have consistently supported objections to his Party's original choice of incineration and at every subsequent decision stage; and the political boundary changes have not weakened the opposition of my constituency Labour Party to a single, centralised incinerator.
The Liberal Democrats dug the Council into a hole by supporting incineration and then allowing SITA to submit a plan that was refused planning permission. Financially, today's meeting may start to move the Council into a more manageable position and make it more likely that costs can be stopped from escalating.
For Cornwall's environment and carbon emissions it is still the wrong decision, caused by the Liberal Democrats who could have stopped the incinerator many of their supporters oppose when they were elected five years ago, and by now delivered a sustainable waste strategy for Cornwall. And fortunately, it may still be possible to do that, provided a single, centralised incinerator can be stopped.
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Truro - a market town with a cathedral.
Truro councillors were informed for the first time last week that since July 2009 a working group has been meeting to draw up plans for a 'strategic investment framework' (SIF) for Truro which will spend part of Cornwall's EU convergence funding to improve transportation ('connectivity') and strengthen business infrastructure. Fortunately, it seems we have managed to get the timetable extended from January to March so that there can be proper discussion of the options summarised in the draft document.
Brought forward in the draft proposals are some elements of the Local Transport Plan which are sustainable, can be match funded by Cornwall Council, and will probably be accepted fairly readily by people who live in Truro. If the funding can be brought together for a park and ride in east Truro and parkway station at Treluswell (which is also in the Falmouth/Penryn community plan, and university proposals), people who are fed up with traffic congestion caused by commuting into and out of Truro may well say 'yes please'. Even if it occurs to them to ask questions about who is going to pay for the buses, trains, and drivers after the EU investment has been made. About half of the residents in the ward I represent (Trehaverne) will probably also take the opportunity to suggest that a more sustainable transport system means there is no need for the proposed distributor road.
Built into the draft document is an assumption that, to be made to work, park and ride must be backed by a robust 'parking strategy'. This will be music to the ears of residents in Gloweth, who have long been exhorting Cornwall Council to introduce a 'parking strategy' for the residential roads near Truro College, the hospital at Treliske, and the existing park and ride near Threemilestone, to stop people parking inconsiderately on their kerbs and verges. Presumably, this means the new park and rides will be expected to be cheap or free for commuters, and parking in the centre of Truro will be horribly expensive and subject to meticulous civil enforcement (as it is now). Truro isn't the only Cornish town where some people will be calling for fairer, free or cheaper parking for local residents, and they have my support. Cornwall Council's latest draft 'parking strategy' puts Truro - which is the fourth largest centre of population in Cornwall - in a category all of it's own as a 'city'. Like St Davids, Truro is a town that is only called a city because it has a cathedral. Plymouth or Exeter it's not. There is a 'large towns' category which lists other places in Cornwall, three of which are larger than Truro - if Cornwall's new parking strategy is going to have categories, that's the one Truro should be in.
As a Councillor, there is no getting away from parking, but other aspects of the draft Truro SIF proposals concern me more. One is a suggestion that £225,000 ERDF might be spent on a Truro town centre traffic study. As Councils without access to ERDF manage to design town centre traffic systems, I think it is completely wrong to try to divert some of the last, stretched EU funding that Cornwall will be eligible for into this everyday business.
The second concern is bigger. We were told that one of the reasons why councillors were not involved in earlier discussions is that the working group was 'technical'. That being so, you would think the working group would have drawn on the available technical studies which form part of the draft local development framework, which was recently scheduled by Cornwall Council to complete its inspection two years from now (December 2011). This includes important studies of flood risk management, given Truro is located in a river basin, and renewable energy - both seeking to address issues neglected in the earlier 'core strategy' document which failed it's inspection partly because of inadequate attention to climate change risks.
EU convergence investment is supposed to deliver zero carbon economic growth including new green sector jobs and businesses. My heart sank at the answers I was given about this at the briefing meeting. The Council has signed up to 10:10 at my instigation, and is utilising it's powers to promote microgeneration, but it didn't occur to me we would have a difficult job getting it built into the EU convergence programme planning for Truro. The draft document includes just one funding proposal to research and develop an implementation plan for an energy supply company (ESCO). Other aspects of the draft SIF document and evidence base directly contradict the renewable energy technical study produced for Truro's draft local plan. So it should be back to the drawing board with a need to make rapid progress on alternative additional proposals in the early new year.
Brought forward in the draft proposals are some elements of the Local Transport Plan which are sustainable, can be match funded by Cornwall Council, and will probably be accepted fairly readily by people who live in Truro. If the funding can be brought together for a park and ride in east Truro and parkway station at Treluswell (which is also in the Falmouth/Penryn community plan, and university proposals), people who are fed up with traffic congestion caused by commuting into and out of Truro may well say 'yes please'. Even if it occurs to them to ask questions about who is going to pay for the buses, trains, and drivers after the EU investment has been made. About half of the residents in the ward I represent (Trehaverne) will probably also take the opportunity to suggest that a more sustainable transport system means there is no need for the proposed distributor road.
Built into the draft document is an assumption that, to be made to work, park and ride must be backed by a robust 'parking strategy'. This will be music to the ears of residents in Gloweth, who have long been exhorting Cornwall Council to introduce a 'parking strategy' for the residential roads near Truro College, the hospital at Treliske, and the existing park and ride near Threemilestone, to stop people parking inconsiderately on their kerbs and verges. Presumably, this means the new park and rides will be expected to be cheap or free for commuters, and parking in the centre of Truro will be horribly expensive and subject to meticulous civil enforcement (as it is now). Truro isn't the only Cornish town where some people will be calling for fairer, free or cheaper parking for local residents, and they have my support. Cornwall Council's latest draft 'parking strategy' puts Truro - which is the fourth largest centre of population in Cornwall - in a category all of it's own as a 'city'. Like St Davids, Truro is a town that is only called a city because it has a cathedral. Plymouth or Exeter it's not. There is a 'large towns' category which lists other places in Cornwall, three of which are larger than Truro - if Cornwall's new parking strategy is going to have categories, that's the one Truro should be in.
As a Councillor, there is no getting away from parking, but other aspects of the draft Truro SIF proposals concern me more. One is a suggestion that £225,000 ERDF might be spent on a Truro town centre traffic study. As Councils without access to ERDF manage to design town centre traffic systems, I think it is completely wrong to try to divert some of the last, stretched EU funding that Cornwall will be eligible for into this everyday business.
The second concern is bigger. We were told that one of the reasons why councillors were not involved in earlier discussions is that the working group was 'technical'. That being so, you would think the working group would have drawn on the available technical studies which form part of the draft local development framework, which was recently scheduled by Cornwall Council to complete its inspection two years from now (December 2011). This includes important studies of flood risk management, given Truro is located in a river basin, and renewable energy - both seeking to address issues neglected in the earlier 'core strategy' document which failed it's inspection partly because of inadequate attention to climate change risks.
EU convergence investment is supposed to deliver zero carbon economic growth including new green sector jobs and businesses. My heart sank at the answers I was given about this at the briefing meeting. The Council has signed up to 10:10 at my instigation, and is utilising it's powers to promote microgeneration, but it didn't occur to me we would have a difficult job getting it built into the EU convergence programme planning for Truro. The draft document includes just one funding proposal to research and develop an implementation plan for an energy supply company (ESCO). Other aspects of the draft SIF document and evidence base directly contradict the renewable energy technical study produced for Truro's draft local plan. So it should be back to the drawing board with a need to make rapid progress on alternative additional proposals in the early new year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
