Liberal Democrats

See Green MP Caroline Lucas talking about the broken promises in the Lib Dem manifesto at:

http://yorkshireandhumber.greenparty.org.uk/region/yorkshireandhumber

I never thought to see the day when Liberals, given their first share in Government in my lifetime, proposed keeping Trident, cutting public services, privatising Royal Mail, voting against proportional representation in voting and continuing the war in Afghanistan. Strange and sad times indeed.

Allerton Quarry Incinerator

North Yorkshire County Council and York Council propose to build a £900m incinerator to dispose of waste. There will be a series of public consultations, including one at the Catterick Garrison Leisure Centre at 10.00 am on Wednesday 22/9/2010. NYCC have issued what I believe to be a misleading briefing in their propaganda sheet, the NY Times. To redress the balance, I have written what I believe to be relevant facts about this controversial proposal.

1. I understand that this is a commercial venture belonging to Amey Cespa of Spain, but is being funded by NYCC and York Council under a PFI scheme. The Councils, not the Spanish company will therefore be taking the commercial risks. This will saddle North Yorkshire Council taxpayers with 25 years of debt. The minimum total cost to NYCC taxpayers over 25 years is estimated at £1.4 billion at today’s prices, assuming all the financial assumptions are correct.

2. These assumptions include the OVER capacity that has been built into the contract, based on an unrealistic future waste tonnage INCREASE (not decline) and population growth. The contract assumes only 50% recycling is achieved by 2020 (we are nearly there now!). The contract will further financially penalise the councils if the level of waste to feed the incinerator is too LOW! It therefore discourages attempts to recycle above 50% or reduce waste generally. Switzerland, the Netherlands and Austria have national recycling rates of 60% or more.

3. At least half a million jobs would be created in Europe if member states recycled 70% of their waste, according to a Friends of the Earth (FoE) study http://www.foeeurope.org/publications/2010/More_Jobs_Less_Waste_Sep2010.pdf. The report comes one week after José Manuel Barroso called for three million new green jobs by 2020. The Allerton Park site will only employ up to 70 staff, with a similar or greater LOSS of jobs likely at landfill sites.

4. The scheme depends on the import of at least 100,000 tonnes of commercial waste per annum to feed the incinerator. There is no guarantee that that amount of commercial waste would be available to Allerton Park, which would be a substantial financial risk to NYCC. There are currently plans for 65 new incinerators to be built in the UK, in addition to the 25 incinerators that already exist in the UK. Overcapacity in the stock of waste incinerators in Germany and Netherlands has led to the import of waste from other countries. Sheffield City Council Planners asked their incinerator operator Veolia to explain why in 2002 Veolia argued that a projected 80,000 tonne per annum shortfall could be filled with commercial waste, when now “it is now being argued that this level of commercial waste is a problem”. RPS replied: “The composition [of] commercial wastes today do not reflect the circumstances which prevailed in 2001”. http://ukwin.org.uk/2008/07/17/did-mcdonalds-give-sheffields-incinerator-indigestion/ ) It is likely that Amey Cespa are equally being over optimistic in their forecasts of commercial waste available.

5. DEFRA on behalf of the Government is reviewing the treatment of waste nationally. Their aim is (I quote): “The Review will look at all aspects of waste policy and delivery in England. Its main aim will be to ensure that we are taking the right steps towards creating a ‘zero waste’ economy, where resources are fully valued, and nothing of value gets thrown away.” This presumably includes being thrown into an incinerator, so the Allerton Park plan seems premature. http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/waste-review/index.htm

6. Professor Paul Connett, a leading environmental campaigner over the last 25 years, has ridiculed the “pathetic” recycling targets set by North Yorkshire County Council and York Council. “It is an out-dated technology with no flexibility and the councils are living in the 19th century if they push ahead with the incinerator plans. It simply should have no place in the 21st century. (Yorkshire Post 13/9/2010). Prof Connett claimed a 75 per cent recycling target is achievable and pointed towards cities such as San Francisco, which have made huge strides in boosting recycling rates. The Californian city hit a 50 per cent recycling rate a decade ago and is now up to 75 per cent and is aiming towards a zero waste policy by 2020.

7. All incinerators produce dioxins that are vented into the atmosphere and are a risk to health. In Sweden, the lowest levels have been measured at 0.1 ng/m3n in Malmö, Sweden, which is equipped with a dry scrubber/fabric filter. This technology is regarded as being the best technology available for municipal waste incinerators, but it is not clear whether this is included in the Allerton proposal. Either way some dioxins will still escape into the atmosphere.

8. Sweden is held up as an advertisement for incineration as 45% of waste is incinerated there. Sweden has a major industry exporting Waste to Energy schemes, often linked to district heating schemes in very cold areas. These industries date back to the 1970s and are increasingly controversial in Sweden, blamed for keeping down the country’s recycling rate, which is less than in other European countries.

9. The proposed siting of the incinerator near Knaresborough is close to a Grade 1 listed building.

10. There are fears that having commissioned an incinerator, recycling rates will plummet, as happened in Nottingham and Sheffield. Sheffield now has to negotiate efforts to improve recycling with the operators of their incinerator. York Green Party have commented “Other Councils such as Milton Keynes and Lancashire have ruled out using incineration in their waste policy. Incineration has proven again and again to be costly, polluting and deeply unpopular – and to undermine waste reduction and recycling. As a method of energy generation it is absurd. It would be far more cost effective to invest in energy conservation and renewables than building inefficient plants to dispose of material we didn’t need to produce in the first place.”

11. Materials produced by the new facility will include methane from the anaerobic slime that will be used to increase Co2 in the atmosphere by burning it to generate power. Also produced will be potentially toxic residue (bottom ash) that will be incorporated into building aggregate for use under your new drive or house. This toxic waste will be transported out via the nearby A1 and will potentially be blown from these lorries into villages adjacent to the A1, such as Brompton on Swale.

12. Workers from North Yorkshire County Council were sent out to remove signs protesting against the Allerton Park plans that had been put up in villages close to the proposed site. According to Mr Drury, the parish clerk for Little Ribston, 18 signs have gone missing in recent weeks. “It seems the council is intent on smothering any dissenting voices about the scheme to make sure that is goes through smoothly. I’d hate to think that it is a foregone conclusion that the incinerator will be built but that is the way it seems,” he said. “No-one who I have spoken to is against the Allerton Park site being used for recycling. But what every person who I have talked to is against is the incinerator.” (Yorkshire Post 03/09/2010).

13. Liberal Democrat groups and Councillors have campaigned against planned incinerators in Dovesdale, Wiltshire, Plymouth, Bedford, Marston Vale, Bardon, Suffolk, Widnes and many more places. Their general election manifesto opposed incinerators unless alternatives such as waste reduction and increased recycling were not possible. Waste reduction and recycling above 50% are not catered for in the Allerton proposal, so York and NYCC Liberal Democrat councillors should oppose this incinerator if they are going to be true to their manifesto commitments. Unfortunately some still need persuading of this.

14. Richard Lane of YRAIN (York Residents Against Incineration) says “It was no surprise that the Waste Management companies consulted all came back with plans for big burners. It’s easy and profitable to build an incinerator – just stack up the rubbish and send it up the chimney for the next 25 years. But we need to do better than this – we need to protect recycling, reduce greenhouse gases, and reduce waste. That is the sustainable route, but unfortunately also the less profitable one. Private operators looking to turn a buck will not do this without political leadership, and this has been sadly lacking.”

15. Further information can be obtained at The North Yorkshire Waste Action Group (NYWAG - http://www.nywag.org website - others include the Tockwith Residents Association, tockwith.net, who fought a long-running campaign against an attempt to build an incinerator near to their village, and the Marton-cum-Grafton village website. There is also an online petition at http://www.gopetition.co.uk/petitions/dont-incinerate-north-yorkshire/sign.html

Over the Rainbow?

What was more important to the British public: David Cameron winning the general election or Danielle getting the role of Dorothy? As the Green Party candidate for Richmond at the last general election, my feeling is that as contests, there was little to choose between them.

The general election was dominated by TV debates focused on three grey men in suits. The Over the Rainbow TV show focused on twenty pretty girls in gingham, so perhaps was the more interesting! There were similarities in that it was youth that won out over experience in both cases. However, unlike Dorothy, in the general election the contestants were not treated equally. All of the smaller parties were excluded from the main debates, with the Green Party and UKIP particularly disadvantaged. At least the Nationalist Parties had separate debates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but neither the Green Party or UKIP were invited onto the panels and their vote was squeezed as a result. In my own case the BBC refused to talk to me as candidate for Richmond throughout the election campaign, unlike the Tory, Labour and Lib Dem candidates. My complaint of bias to the BBC Trust goes unanswered after two weeks, contrary to their own rules.

Yes, the Green Party won in Brighton, which was down to an excellent candidate in Caroline Lucas and a lot of hard work over many years. But think how much better those TV debates would have been with the wit and wisdom of a woman like Caroline Lucas to contrast with the sameness of the three grey men in suits? That is something that this coalition has shown us. The difference between the three grey men was in style not substance. Their policies are interchangeable, as is demonstrated by Nick Clegg’s endorsement of the Tories’ Big Society idea. Tory, Liberal and Labour agree on Afghanistan, nuclear weapons, nuclear energy and punishing the public for the mistakes of politicians and banks. To cover up their MPs’ expenses scandal they have set up yet another quango full of over paid bureaucrats.

Why is it important that the smaller parties are heard? Well apart from the democratic principle of a level playing field, sometimes we get things right. For instance, on Afghanistan, the Tory defence secretary Liam Fox is quoting as saying last Friday that Britain was not a “global policeman” and he would like to see British troops return home “as soon as possible”. Well I hope William Hague, Foreign Secretary and the victor of Richmond, was listening. He may then recall that this was exactly what I said to him in the Richmond hustings at our last general election battle in 2005 (Richmond Zetland Centre 29/4/2005). Since then 282 British service personnel have died in Afghanistan and 104 in Iraq, along with thousands of civilians. If the Government and the people had heard the Green Party message then, perhaps those deaths might have been avoided?

BBC Bias?

Well, the election is over and as we speak, Nick Clegg and David Cameron (and possibly Gordon Brown?) are locked into negotiations as to who will form the Government. This is as it should be as all politics should be about compromise around the common good. No British Government since World War II has had the support of the majority of the British people (in terms of votes) and it is time that democracy, in terms of the will of the majority, be returned to the UK. After all coalitions were common in the UK after the rise of the Labour Party up to and including the war.

We in the Green Party had mixed fortunes. There was the astonishing win by Caroline Lucas to become the first Green MP in Britain and the very first in the world to be elected under a first past the post system. My congratulations go out to Caroline and her Brighton team.

In the rest of the country, however, the Green Party and to be fair ALL the smaller parties were punished by the polarisation of support brought about by the TV debates. Not just the Prime Ministerial debates, all the local and cabinet debates focused just on three grey men in suits from the Westminster parties. In Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales the nationalist parties were given a platform, but in England, TV viewers were told again and again that the race was between Tory, Labour and Liberal Democrat and other voices, including the Green Party were suppressed.

Here in the Richmond constituency, BBC North East steadfastly refused to talk to me as the Green Party candidate for Richmond. How many times did you see the Conservative candidate William Hague on the local news and debate programmes (Look North etc)?
Most blatantly, however, was a report by BBC Radio Tees (repeated on BBC Radio York) on Friday 28th April. I am told that BBC Radio Tees did a feature on the Richmond (Yorks) constituency. I am told that they interviewed the Labour, Tory and Liberal Democrat candidates. I am told, but not by the BBC, who did not have the courtesy to inform the Richmond Green Party that the programme was even being broadcast. The BBC editorial guidelines say that the BBC should be impartial in its election coverage. How is it impartial to interview just three out of the four candidates standing in the Richmond constituency? How is it impartial to give dozens of opportunities for other Richmond candidates to voice their views on the BBC during the campaign, but to block all attempts by the Richmond Green Party to get its views across?

Never again must local and national broadcast stations be allowed to manipulate public opinion in the way they did in this election. Never again should such blatant discrimination against the smaller parties be allowed to undermine democracy. Never again will we allow BBC bias to go un-reported. Watch this space!

Green Grand Tour

Still travelling around the constituency today (Monday). We continue to get a positive response from people in all parts of this, the largest constituency in England. Even got a new Green Party member.

Today’s swing through the Yorkshire Dales National Park included stops at East Witton, Middleham, Leyburn, Bainbridge, Gayle and Hawes. Whilst William Hague continues to make just brief appearances in the constituency, the Green Party is continuing to visit the parts other parties cannot reach.

Previously I have visited most parts of the constituency including Stokesley, Great Ayton, Osmotherley, Northallerton Bedale, Richmond, Catterick, Swaledale and Arkengarthdale and many points in between.

The Liberal Democrat is so committed to Richmond, his election leaflet has a photograph on the front with cars driving on the right hand side of the road, clearly taken on the continent. If you look closely there are other clues too: the driver sitting on the left of the car, the WHITE rear number plate, the number one on the wall that looks like a seven.

As Mr Meredith lives in Brussels, I guess he could not spare the time to visit Richmond for a photograph until the election was called. The likelihood of us seeing much of the Liberal Democrat after the election is remote.

Unlike the Tories and Liberal Democrats, I am fully committed to the Richmond constituency and not focused on my own political career like Messrs Hague and Meredith. As for Labour, well the Green Party got 50% more votes than Labour in the County Council seats we fought last year. For real change, you need the Green Party.

Freedom of the Press (not to turn up)

Great hustings on Friday night, if you, like the Darlington and Stockton Times, happened to miss it. I got the first round of applause and the first laugh. I even had William Hague promising to read the Green Party manifesto.

As reported, all the Richmond Candidates turned up, even William Hague who had said he was too busy. Then I got a letter pointing this out printed in the D&S Times and, hey presto, William appears! The Labour candidate tried hard, but was weak. The Liberal Democrat has been parachuted in from Brussels: clearly given a seat the Lib Dems can't win to serve his apprenticeship. His inexperience showed.

Not everything was perfect (you know how you think of something more pithy to say just after sitting down?), but all in all it was a good night for the Green Party. It was just a pity that BBC North East continues to refuse to talk to me and BBC York interviewed all the other candidates that morning, deliberately excluding the Green Party. As for the Darlington and Stockton Times they reported on the hustings, going into detail about William Hague. It was just a pity their report was printed the morning BEFORE the hustings took place!!!!

Success !!

In a previous blog I reported that William Hague had refused to turn up to the hustings due this Friday (30/4/10) at the Methodist Church in Richmond (7.30 pm). I repeated this complaint in a letter to the Darlington and Stockton Times (see last blog).
On the doorstep, his constituents started to complain about being taken for granted. As the sitting MP with a large majority, Hague showed his complacency by touring marginal seats the length and breadth of the UK (including Northern Ireland) whilst being unavailable to his Richmond constituents. Even the Red Fox from “Make Cruelty History” could not find him (see the hilarious clip of the Red Fox failing to find anyone at William Hague’s campaign HQ at http://cruelsports.wordpress.com/category/keep-cruelty-history/ then scroll down to day 2. The only candidate that met the red fox face to face by the way, was me - see same video where I make my support for the hunting ban clear.)

After my letter was printed in the D&S Times, the Tories started to panic. For weeks they had made it clear that no one from the Conservative Party would be at the 30th April hustings. Then yesterday (Tuesday 27/4/10) a telephone call from the Church minister organising the hustings informed me that Anne McIntosh was going to appear in place of the “far too busy” William Hague. Ms McIntosh was made notorious during the MPs’ expenses scandal for having her gardening paid for (tax free) almost every month from 2004 until the Daily Telegraph rumbled her. Clearly an embarrassment to her Party, perhaps this was something to do to keep her out of the way?
But still, my letter had worked and the Tory stonewall was crumbling. Then the Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates, perhaps a little shaken by the prospect of facing “Rotweiler” McIntosh, complained that she was not a candidate. The Labour Party rang me to persuade me to join their opposition, but frankly I was looking forward to tackling Ms McIntosh about her MP’s expenses.
However, the minister rang me late this afternoon (28/4/10) to say the Tories had changed their mind again and William Hague was now going to come to the hustings after all!

SUCCESS! The Green Party had succeeded in getting Hague to meet his constituents. I rang Elizabeth, my press officer to tell her the good news, only to discover that she had just been told this by her press contacts. It seems that the Tories had informed the Press first, before anyone else.

But the bitter pill comes at the end. William Hague has appeared on TV and radio broadcast by the BBC and others on numerous occasions during this election. Last night on the BBC Look North Election 2010 he was introduced as the “Conservative candidate for Richmond”, a clear breach of broadcasting guidelines as the BBC had not invited me or the other Richmond candidates to the debate. In fact not once during this election has BBC North East invited me to appear on a programme. Now with their last opportunity to redress the balance, none of the broadcast media are going to attend the hustings. Even worse the newspapers are refusing to attend as well. Was that the reason why William Hague contacted the media first? He knows that facing his electorate will be embarrassment for him. So whilst William Hague basks in the spotlight of the media, his political rivals go unreported. This election is supposed to be about you electing your representative to Parliament. It has become a media circus of celebrities, with fair and balanced debate left out in the cold.