Operators of the planned incinerator ash processing plant in Buckfastleigh stand to make millions of pounds by exploiting a tax loophole, says the Buckfastleigh Community Forum.
Neil Smith, chairman of Buckfastleigh Community Forum, an economist by profession, has spent the last six months studying the small print of the proposal which has provoked widespread opposition in Buckfastleigh.
He has sent his detailed findings to Danny Alexander MP, Chief Secretary to the Treasury and to the Environment Secretary, Caroline Spelman MP and will be sharing them with residents at a public meeting at Buckfastleigh Town Hall tonight (Wednesday, September 28) at 7.30pm.
He has calculated that by ensuring that the incinerator ash is classified as being ‘inert’ – the lowest possible risk category – and by filling the quarry void Whitecleave Quarry, MVV Environment (Devonport) Ltd, Gilpin Demolition Ltd and the quarry owner could between them avoid paying substantial amounts in tax.
Neil said: “It is our estimate that MVV would avoid approximately £5m a year in landfill taxes on this one site alone if the IBA waste is categorized as ‘inert’. If the IBA truly is inert, why does it need to ‘weather’ outdoors for weeks before it can be processed?”
UK-wide, if all 100 plus incinerator applications are granted, Neil estimates that operators could avoid paying taxes of £500m by 2015.
Gilpin Demolition Ltd maintain that they intend to sell-on the mixed secondary aggregate, but there are doubts that the market is there because of the abundance of secondary aggregate supplied by the china clay industry. More likely, it would end up in the quarry.
“The storage capacity in the quarry is likely to be over 200,000 tonnes. If it is in-filled with IBA it would very likely be categorized as ‘quarry engineering’ rather than landfill thus avoiding up to £20m in tax payments by our estimates,” he said.
What makes this possible, he argues is the weak regulatory framework, in which the Environment Agency appears to listen more to big business than to communities.
Neil said: “We note that the Environment Agency is moving to a ‘light touch’ regulatory approach, partly as a response to budget constraints. This puts much more focus on self-policing.
“From my background in the financial industry, I know how disastrous this can be. In practice this can mean that industry sets the rules with the so-called regulator acting as little more than a rubber-stamping body.
“To my knowledge the Environment Agency has never once turned down an application for a waste incinerator, even ones that have gone on to create significant public health risks.
He says there is plenty of evidence to suggest that far from being harmless, as the company asserts, incinerator bottom ash (IBA) is hazardous and poses significant health risks to humans and wildlife.
“Beyond Buckfastleigh, this is a national issue. The proposed incinerator at Devonport dockyard, Plymouth is one of around one hundred in various stages of planning all over the country,” said Neil.
“If the development goes ahead, while the operators get rich, the community and the environment will be left counting the costs for generations to come.”
(from a press release)
Come and enjoy Devon – book a hotel and get away!
Related posts:
- Incinerator facts are far more sensational than spin – Buckfastleigh Community Forum calls for open debate to put the record straight The furore over an advert decrying the incinerator plans for...
- Quarry developers making false claims says community group The developers behind the incinerator in Buckfastleigh have being refuting...
- Recycling your low energy bulbs locally: Buckfastleigh group links with shop for environmental recycling Buckfastleigh environmental group Buck The Trend and Buckfastleigh shop J...
