Rugby Town.... (Much more than just cement.)

WARWICKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL CEMEX RUGBY WAR RAGES ON

RBC PREDICTS ENVIRONMENTAL CALAMITY

SOUTHAM AND RUGBY BATTLE IT OUT!

WHICH will draw the CEMEX short straw, and have the 500,000 tonne a year WASTE PLANT and all its EMISSIONS and LORRIES dumped on them. Cemex has made two applications, at Rugby and at Southam, in a bid to turn 500,000 tpa household, commercial and industrial waste into 250,000 tpa into CHEAP Refuse Derived Fuel - friendly name "CLIMAFUEL." Meanwhile the WARWICKSHIRE WASTE PARTNERSHIP enters into agreements to burn most of Warwickshire's waste in Coventry's enlarged incinerator, leaving bemused bystanders to wonder where ALL this waste will come from? Rugby has beaten its 50% re-cycling target, so why are we being penalised for that?


SAFETY FEARS OVER WASTE PLANT!

SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT UNREALISTIC!

PROTECTION OF RUGBY RESIDENTS IS NOT GUARANTEED! as Rugby Advertiser front page 13 August says : Rugby Councillors "hotly contest" and "DAMN the controversial Cemex plans" and tell WCC that "THIS SITE IS NOT SUITABLE" and that Rugby residents are already suffering air quality and pollution problems, and the town is blighted more than enough with the BLOT! The local residents, who live down wind of the monstrous CO-INCINERATOR, in deprived wards, and in areas of MULTIPLE DEPRIVATION, fear a repetition of the CORBY CALAMITY, and now understand that the so-called by the Environment Agency's "ONLY nuisance dust", is actually toxic, and hazardous, and causes health effects.

CEMEX SAYS:

"In addition to the original 2,000 pages of text, analysis, diagrams, and maps we have just submitted a further 500 pages of information as requested. This covered the chimney height, now having reduced the dispersion from 91 metres high to 35 metres - only 14 metres above the building - and information on air quality, groundwater and traffic, and we find it difficult to understand why the Rugby Council feels it needs more information."

12 August the RBC Planning Committee threw it out and dared WCC to go ahead with it in Rugby now!

WARWICKSHIRE TELEGRAPH:

VILLAGE FURY AT WASTE DECISION.
CEMEX WASTE PLANT NOT TO BE BUILT!
14 August Mary Griffins reports : "Villagers feel like second class citizens after RBC opposed the waste plant in Rugby but approved it in the countryside. Long Itchington, Marton and Princethorpe residents fear being bombarded with lorries." (Rugby already has about 1,000 Cemex HGVs each day in the AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT AREA caused by Nitrogen dioxide emissions from lorries and from Cemex co-incinerator.) Traffic will come from all directions, and although we appreciate it is far too close to homes in Rugby, leading to pollution, air quality, odour, amenity and other environmental disasters and FUNDAMENTALLY IT SHOULD NOT BE BUILT AT ALL!

STEWART DAVIES SERCO :

SERCO is to lead the LONDON 6,000 BIKE HIRE as the mayor grants the contract to Serco, with no room for OYSTER.
The 6,000 bikes will be based in nine London Boroughs. Stewart Davies makes good again as Corby and Rugby lick their wounds.


RETROSPECTIVE PLANNING PERMISSIONS
Warwickshire County Council breaks all records for the most number of unlawful planning permissions granted to a company! RUGBY CEMENT virtually always builds first, without applying, knowing that the tame planners and Councillors at WCC will simply nod it through as usual - without any proper public consultation, any environmental impact assessment, and in breach of the EU and UK laws on EIA and Public Participation.

Indeed this is how the cement plant was built - unlawfully!
And operated by the Environment Agency - unlawfully! And became a CO-INCINERATOR - unlawfully!
THANKS are due to WCC!!

Often the councillors break their own constitution, and attend site visits "in secret" BEFORE the application is even heard in Committee in a blatant effort to outwit the public who are affected. WCC have dug themselves into a fine corner this time. The government position on this is apparently in PPG 18, issued in 1991 and long outdated and superseded by other laws. PPG says they can go on building and building and getting retrospective permissions as much as they want - an the worst thing that may happen to them IF the Local Planning Authority were to pluck up courage and to tell them to "STOP! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!" would be a maximum slap-on-the-wrist £20,000 fine. Peanuts!