§ 2. Bob Russell (Colchester)If she will make representations to Essex county council to encourage it to exclude incineration as an option in the county waste management plan. [126278]
§ The Minister for the Environment (Mr. Elliot Morley)County waste management plans are a matter for the relevant county. It is for it to decide, following consultation, what options to include in line with the waste hierarchy and the best practicable environmental option as set out in Waste Strategy 2000.
§ Bob RussellThe Minister will not be surprised to be told that that is the usual answer that we are given. I pay tribute to his predecessor, the right hon. Member for Oldham, West and Royton (Mr. Meacher), for being the best friend that the environmental lobby had—some would say the only friend—in this Government. He was of the view that there is no legal requirement on Essex county council to include incineration in its waste plan. Unfortunately, the Conservative-controlled county council claims that there is. Given the confusion, would the Minister come to county hall, Chelmsford and explain exactly why the scheme is necessary, as his predecessor accepted a similar invitation to do just that?
§ Mr. MorleyI must say that I did not notice that in the diary, but of course I will look at that invitation and treat it with respect. I emphasise to the hon. Gentleman that the green lobby is not friendless in the Government. As for whether there is a legal requirement to include incineration in the waste plan, the answer is that there is not. It is something for the waste authorities to look at in relation to the disposal hierarchy, at the top of which is waste minimisation. In some circumstances, there may be a case for some form of incineration or thermal treatment—incineration is not the only option. However, the choice of the most appropriate disposal and the most appropriate technology for dealing with waste is a local one.
§ Andrew Mackinlay (Thurrock)May I tell the Minister that if he is going to Chelmsford, he will not get there without going through Thurrock, where we can show him the wholly unacceptable effects of decades of landfill? All those wretched barges that go past the House are heading to Thurrock with London's waste. The message that I want to give the Minister is that waste must be disposed of in the place where it is produced, not in my backyard or that of my constituents. While I am sympathetic to the point made by the hon. Member for Colchester (Bob Russell), anything is better than landfill—the polluter must always pay.
§ Mr. MorleyI certainly agree with my hon. Friend who makes a persuasive case for going to Thurrock as well.
In the hierarchy of disposal, landfill is at the very bottom, and should he the last resort. We strongly support the proximity principle of dealing with waste as near as possible to the place where it is generated. However, the key is that there must be a clear policy across the country, and local authorities need to play 422 their part in reducing the amount of waste going to landfill. Central Government will play their part through the implementation of waste programmes, including the waste resources action programme. However, this is about meeting those targets, minimising waste and reducing the amount going to landfill.
§ Mr. SpeakerJerry Wiggin.
§ Mr. Bill Wiggin (Leominster)Thank you Mr. Speaker, on behalf of myself and the rest of my family—I feel very welcome.
I have just spoken to Essex county council, and the Minister will be interested to know that it neither promotes nor excludes incineration. I can understand why incineration is such a contentious subject in Essex—nobody wants an incinerator in their backyard. Thanks to the fallen stock directive, there will 200,000 tonnes of fallen stock to incinerate, including 1.3 million adult animals, 2.6 million immature ones, and 36 million poultry. Should not the Minister insist on energy recovery from incineration, which might have a better and more important impact on our environment than the fallen stock directive?
§ Mr. MorleyFirst, may I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new role on the Opposition Front Bench? I certainly look forward to his contributions in future.
Incineration is not the only option for dealing with fallen stock, as rendering is another important method. On the serious point that the hon. Gentleman made about incineration, I should say that, occasionally, there may well be a role for it. The UK's incineration capacity may be the lowest in Europe in relation to waste structures, but if incineration or other forms of thermal treatment such as gasification are to be used, I agree that. wherever possible, they should be designed so as to recover heat and energy from waste, particularly in combined cycle processes. That option can certainly be considered. I accept that Essex has not ruled incineration in or out, but the priority is finding the most appropriate way of minimising the amount of waste going to landfill.