Friday, September 28, 2007


..wanting more cash for their teas sacrificed the Rugby Cement Community Forum to Cemex at last night's Council meeting. Sean Lawson wrote a bigoted report making many unsupported and unjustified false claims, not least that the RCCF "cost too much", but he refused to provide any figures or costs. Nor to say what part of the "excessive costs" were incurred by his unnecessary presence at the RCCF meetings. Maybe his salary should be cut - seeing as how he costs too much?

All this left Councillors uninformed and ridiculous, floundering in the dark, and wondering what exactly they were talking about - as usual! Labour and Lib Dems spoke up well on behalf of the Community, and on the damage that Cemex does to Rugby. One long-standing councillor said that Rugby Cement had always lied! This "handover" to Cemex was an unmitigated disaster, and that the Tories haven't seen anything yet. They spoke about how the community would rise up against the Tory dictators in Rugby.

Tory dwarfs:
TIMMS the ringleader: Robbins; Bull Sewell; Allen; Cranham; Hazelton; Spiers; Watson. The new boys looked so embarrassed and uncomfortable, being whipped in to toe the party line, that they only managed to hold up their hands about three inches off the desk to vote.

Robbins argued that "the polluter should pay" but could not say why they were not insistent that Cemex pay for the Forum as it is now. £7,500 is to be used from the HEALTH PROTECTION budget to find some new, more compliant, naive, uninformed people to "actively support Cemex" on the the new Cemex controlled Forum. At least they at last acknowledge that the cement company is a polluter and IS a HEALTH ISSUE..

Labour's Tina Avis, Ish Mistry, and Lib Dems Neil Sandison, Noreen New and Chris Holman all spoke up well to try to protect the community from the growing excesses of Cemex, and are making a minority report to the FULL COUNCIL. All the committees at RBC have a majority of Tory members on them so they can just vote through what they want. Tories clearly do not have a majority in the IQ stakes - in fact they are very poorly represented as far as intelligence is
concerned - which was well demonstrated by last night's abysmal display!

Not only that but also the Agency had been working in secret with Cemex and RBC, behind the backs of the Councillors and community representatives, and breached the Council's Code of Conduct. A total lack of respect, and the usual failure to consult.

Typical Agency behaviour!

What price Rugby's silver medal in the national IN BLOOM competition? The main sponsor was Cemex. So far the Council refuses to say how much Cemex has paid them. Instead of properly funding the RCCF Cemex have given Rugby people a few dead flowers - weeds even! How cheaply this Tory Council has sold out Rugby residents, disposed of any democratic or community involvement, and handed control of the Forum to Cemex.

This year's just published Spotlight revealed a growing perception that the report has lost its way. The problem is that the Agency has erred, and strayed from Spotlight's original purpose - to put public pressure on poorly performing firms. Unfortunately by including case studies of good performance, and by covering other issues such as data on releases, waste production, and site management, the report lacks analysis of what the data means in context of the Agency's strategic objectives. It chose to focus this year's report on climate change, despite the fact that it does not regulate most green house gases.


Cemex Rugby £400,000
Thames Water £191,600
United Utilities £137,300
Van Dalen £100,000
Castle Cement £ 99,000 PADESWOOD DIOXINS
Anglian Water £ 75,000
Wiggins Transport £ 63,000
Wessex Water £ 56,250
Agresol £ 54,000
Southern Water £ 52,625
Cemex Rugby £ 50,000 Fine reduced June 2007.
Coe of Ilford £ 48,000
Erith Haulage £ 48,000

The Agency claims pollution incidents have (just) reduced to an all-time low. However that is not the experience in Rugby - it's simply that the Agency puts the burden of proof onto the public. We have to prove where the pollution has come from, and the polluter usually denies it! The Agency covers for them. And then, for example, during the pollution incident of 10th March 2007 when Cemex "admitted" to dropping eight tonnes of pulverised coal on our heads, heated in the recirculated gasses from the combustion process, the Agency STILL, seven months on, has not managed to assess the size of the particles; the chemical content nor the potential health impact. Apart from a little enforcement notice Cemex remains unpunished.
How many tonnes constitutes a pollution incident? Eight tonnes are not enough, so no chance of any action for the daily grime!

1 comment:

Anonymous said...


The case studies on there are most interesting including one about Holcim that says there is nothing to be done with a Liaison Group made up of the WRONG membership, except to get rid of it - quick!

Rugby Cement has a little gem - "the costs of not conducting communications and stakeholder involvement", in which Dr David Evans (now of Cemex) admits the enormous costs in not thoroughly discussing the burning of wastes with the community, and the dangers of not allocation sufficient resources. They under-estimated the strength of the local opposition, and the relationship with the community dissolved over night. One outcome was to form a liaison group that included citizens who were the most vociferous. The company and the Environment Agency use this committee as a sounding board before making any major decisions. Dr Evans said that after spending a majority of two years, and his salary, and countless time of other staff, and after five years of the "new liaison" committee meetings, trust has been re-established. Dr Evans says he has learned a lot from this experience. Oh?

Trust - what trust? That was at Barrington in the early 1990's - and we have seen what happened there in 2006 when Cemex have been forced to withdraw from expansion plans.

Are these industry guys slow learners, or what?

Researcher - corporate disasters.