Sunday, September 28, 2008



On Heritage Open Day!

INSULTATION PROCESS - OPPORTUNITY KNOCKS BUT ONCE as Cemex plans to double air quality and health impact on DOPEY RUGBY!!

While the Environment Council DIRECTS PUBLIC ATTENTION AWAY from MAJOR POLLUTION ISSUE using £25,000 from Rugby Council Tax Payers' Health Protection Budget, and PETTY cash from the Environment Agency and Cemex, as we ALL jointly try to find "a new way forward together". Look out for flying pigs, and what they drop! It seems there is an "IMMINENT desperate need" to re-organise the way Cemex and the Agency " liaise, communicate, and engage " with the Rugby community.

Stakeholder relations reached "an all time low", as the RCCF, was virtually destroyed and emasculated by RBC, EA, WCC and by Cemex in an ideal demonstration of "joint-working for the *good/BAD* of the community". Worse is yet to come as the "BIG FOUR" - a name coined for WCC, RBC, the EA and Cemex at the Workshop on 17th September - now collude and try even harder to dupe Rugby residents, by pretending to turn over a new leaf, while secretly planning more environmental disasters. See local press for stories and letters about the "Chameleons".

RUGBY STAKEHOLDERS have had enough of paying while being polluted, and under the polluter-MUST-pay principle need funding in order to obtain openness, honesty, joint fact finding, timely access to full validated data, a proper say in the activities in our environment, and a change in the status quo so that we are not only listened to, but also what we say has an impact on the outcomes. Call me a cynic, but these very spotty leopards are hardly prepared, willing or able to change their spots, and qualities such as these, (honesty?) have never ever been seen in Rugby. Just pass the sticks of Cemtex rock.

Two planning applications are on WCC web for Southam and Rugby's MALPASS proposed Parkfield Road waste plant, have already hit the buffers as the pre-application Scoping Assessment was for a plant 50% smaller than what is now being proposed. Warwickshire CC is firmly in the Waste Partnership with RBC and their BIG GAME PLAN is to "BURN IT ALL IN RUGBY" - to add in another 100% - 250,000 tonnes a year of REFUSE DERIVED FUEL. Meanwhile we can look forward to another 360 lorries or so on 20 kilometres of our local roads, which have many accidents involving 133 personal injury accidents in five years, of which 3 were fatalities and 37 serious. All this for a cement plant cum co-incinerator that never had an EIA, a lawful planning permission, a lawful operating permit and any meaningful public consultation of any kind. WCC is busying itself yet again with more retrospective planning permissions - this time to validate the unlawful fly tipping of 20,000+ tonnes a year of hazardous waste that has been going on at Southam under their watch for EIGHT years. With of course the blessing of that great protector of the environment - the Environment Agency.

THE ENVIRONMENT COUNCIL has taken Rugby residents eye of the ball, during this deliberately most untimely process, and is wondering how to build TRUST and CONFIDENCE in Rugby, doing its level best to improve relations, but Rugby people are sick of being treated as suckers, and would like to reclaim their town from the usurpers. After Monday's press release there is now to be a working party to try to put flesh on the bones of the skeleton future-engagement. But at the same time as we are paying for this, and engaging, Rugby is burning. Cemex was inviting a chosen few to the Southam open days 18-20 September, surprisingly and most disappointedly overlooking the obvious necessity of an invitation to the 60 delegates to see Cemex's plans for our futures! In yet another application to "enhance" our environment, air quality and health there is to be yet another 91 metre chimney to vent off the fumes and odours from the MBT/IHT plant and from the furnace required to tumble dry the Refuse Derived Fuel. They do not seem to have thought about the huge environmental impacts of the transport and processing - and even less about the impact of the increase in co-incineration at Rugby.

WCC/Cemex have submitted an April 2004 report, ( see chapter 12 WCC web held in secret between Laing, WCC and Rugby Cement), into the feasibility of the railway being re-opened ONLY for the 160 clay lorries daily. Certainly now there is a plan to more than double the total HGVs going between Southam and Rugby with clay, and climafuel lorries then a new report into the disused railway should be carried out, and submitted. Obviously it will be much more economic and affordable now they are planning such a huge increase in lorry journeys, and will save the public and roads from millions of lorry miles, which cost so much in terms of accidents, risk, air pollution and damage to the roads, and other road users vehicles, and to the infrastructure.

It appears the Inspector and public were kept in the dark about this secret LAING report, at the Public Inquiry into the route of the Western Relief Road, which resulted in farmers being forced out of their land as the road was routed through the green belt because it was claimed the rail route was required for the Cement plant operations. The WRR was placed in the green belt, at a huge and ever-increasing cost, (£40 million up from the original £11 million), when there was a secret report in which there was no intention of re-opening the railway.

WCC CONSIDERED INSISTING RAILWAY RE-OPENSas a planning condition in 2004, so now they have another golden window of opportunity?
The canals have been ruled out as too costly, too slow and too many locks, Let the narrow gauge train take the strain? Or will it be the repetitious cry: "Alternative rail transport has been considered but without significant external funding, none IS OF economic consideration."


"It is a GOOD thing that the RCCF MAY be recreated as a new body - the current version is unworkable and ineffective."
The RCCF needs an independent chair, access to data, and the public need more access to meetings, an independent venue, trust, access to data, and the Editor criticises the Agency for their non-attendance - the vital ingredient - and for their NON- PROVISION of vital information.

No comments: