Newport councillors in Twitter spat over incinerator

First published in News South Wales Argus: Photograph of the Author by

TWO Labour councillors have taken to Twitter to argue over the rejection of plans to build an incinerator at Llanwern. The spat between Miqdad Al-Nuaimi, councillor for Stow Hill and Rogerstone member Chris Evans began after Cllr Al-Nuaimi voted for the plans despite his party's stated opposition to incineration.

See the Twitter row here:

Comments (37)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:37am Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Haven't read the Twitter but Cllr Al-Nuami is a sound fella and sticks to his guns.
Haven't read the Twitter but Cllr Al-Nuami is a sound fella and sticks to his guns. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

11:40am Fri 27 Jul 12

Mervyn James says...

But a NIMBY who says one thing and does another...
But a NIMBY who says one thing and does another... Mervyn James
  • Score: 0

11:46am Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

MJ - How do you work that one out Mervyn? He voted the way he thought right.
MJ - How do you work that one out Mervyn? He voted the way he thought right. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

12:10pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Gets more interesting. Pity they knocked Rogerstone Power Station down and built houses there. excellent site for an incinerator eh.
Gets more interesting. Pity they knocked Rogerstone Power Station down and built houses there. excellent site for an incinerator eh. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

12:12pm Fri 27 Jul 12

Severn40 says...

Perhaps we should remember that planning committee is non political and that members of the committee have to have an open mind and come to their own conclusions independently. I'm sure all councillors at that meeting followed this requirement.
Perhaps we should remember that planning committee is non political and that members of the committee have to have an open mind and come to their own conclusions independently. I'm sure all councillors at that meeting followed this requirement. Severn40
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Severn - Rubbish ! If you believe that you do not know local government politics.
Severn - Rubbish ! If you believe that you do not know local government politics. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

12:22pm Fri 27 Jul 12

Severn40 says...

As I said I'm sure all councillors acted non politically, had an open mind and came to their own conclusions independently. That's the law.
As I said I'm sure all councillors acted non politically, had an open mind and came to their own conclusions independently. That's the law. Severn40
  • Score: 0

12:25pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Severn - You must be having a joke. Totally political decision. Be honest you are having a laugh.
Severn - You must be having a joke. Totally political decision. Be honest you are having a laugh. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

12:30pm Fri 27 Jul 12

Severn40 says...

Of course I am. By their actions, they have actually made the likelihood of an incinerator more likely but critically have undermined the integrity of the planning process.
Of course I am. By their actions, they have actually made the likelihood of an incinerator more likely but critically have undermined the integrity of the planning process. Severn40
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Severn - We are on same channel.
Severn - We are on same channel. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

1:03pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james jackson says...

A scrap! What fun. We haven't seen one of those for a long time in Newport.
It's usually "solidarity" all the way brothers (and sisters!!!)
Labour councillors in the soup. Acting against planning procedures and likely landing Newport with the incinerator or eye-watering costs when the inspector makes the decision for them.
In the past we would not know the brothers had fallen out, but thanks to tiresome social networks we can all view the histrionics of spoilt men as they bat back and forth, their prejudices.
Miqdad-Al_Nuami, being an educated man, has taken a view on the incinerator, whereas Evans and his like are out to make a name for themselves.
After all, there's no point in being little fish in a big Labour pool. The new crop, with no political experience whatever, are desperate to make their name and fight the old guard, who are strangely silent.
Hannon's comment is just nonsensical. He needs to act like a deputy chair and not a spoil boy and accept that Labour campaigned on the incinerator when they should not have done. Planning is NON-political - or that's what we've been told.
Keep up the exchanges though, it's brightened my day.
If Labour's majority was small, this wouldn't be out in the open. Well done Argus!
A scrap! What fun. We haven't seen one of those for a long time in Newport. It's usually "solidarity" all the way brothers (and sisters!!!) Labour councillors in the soup. Acting against planning procedures and likely landing Newport with the incinerator or eye-watering costs when the inspector makes the decision for them. In the past we would not know the brothers had fallen out, but thanks to tiresome social networks we can all view the histrionics of spoilt men as they bat back and forth, their prejudices. Miqdad-Al_Nuami, being an educated man, has taken a view on the incinerator, whereas Evans and his like are out to make a name for themselves. After all, there's no point in being little fish in a big Labour pool. The new crop, with no political experience whatever, are desperate to make their name and fight the old guard, who are strangely silent. Hannon's comment is just nonsensical. He needs to act like a deputy chair and not a spoil boy and accept that Labour campaigned on the incinerator when they should not have done. Planning is NON-political - or that's what we've been told. Keep up the exchanges though, it's brightened my day. If Labour's majority was small, this wouldn't be out in the open. Well done Argus! james jackson
  • Score: 0

1:07pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

James Jackson - Excellent comment. Seems you, me and Severn are akin - and on the skullduggery in politics.
James Jackson - Excellent comment. Seems you, me and Severn are akin - and on the skullduggery in politics. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

2:30pm Fri 27 Jul 12

Howie' says...

I was in New Zealand during the Council Elections & did not read any of the campaigning literature but if Labour campaigned in the election against this incinerator & it is Labour Policy that Cllr Al-Nuami has voted against then I am surprised that he has not been suspended.
I was in New Zealand during the Council Elections & did not read any of the campaigning literature but if Labour campaigned in the election against this incinerator & it is Labour Policy that Cllr Al-Nuami has voted against then I am surprised that he has not been suspended. Howie'
  • Score: 0

2:33pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

howie - suspended from what? Can only suspend him from Labour Group not the council
howie - suspended from what? Can only suspend him from Labour Group not the council james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

4:05pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james jackson says...

In fact, if you take it down to basics, Councillor Al-Nuami has voted in a proper manner. The other Labour members have acted, one might say, improperly. Maybe the rest of the group could be suspended!
In fact, if you take it down to basics, Councillor Al-Nuami has voted in a proper manner. The other Labour members have acted, one might say, improperly. Maybe the rest of the group could be suspended! james jackson
  • Score: 0

4:07pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Good idea - you know it makes sense
Good idea - you know it makes sense james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

4:53pm Fri 27 Jul 12

Howie' says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
howie - suspended from what? Can only suspend him from Labour Group not the council
Thats what I meant.
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: howie - suspended from what? Can only suspend him from Labour Group not the council[/p][/quote]Thats what I meant. Howie'
  • Score: 0

5:10pm Fri 27 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Howie - Big deal! Hardly going to cause a nuke war is it. He wouldn't be the first to have the whip taken away.
Howie - Big deal! Hardly going to cause a nuke war is it. He wouldn't be the first to have the whip taken away. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

11:38pm Fri 27 Jul 12

Howie' says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
Howie - Big deal! Hardly going to cause a nuke war is it. He wouldn't be the first to have the whip taken away.
No James, you are quite right it is hardly likely to cause a Nuclear war.

I was expressing surprise as he has gone against Policy & what I have heard that Labour promised in their Manifesto & Labour has not suspended him.

I'm sorry if you think I have gone off topic, James!

Note too self: Howie must stay on topic...............
Naughty Howie
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: Howie - Big deal! Hardly going to cause a nuke war is it. He wouldn't be the first to have the whip taken away.[/p][/quote]No James, you are quite right it is hardly likely to cause a Nuclear war. I was expressing surprise as he has gone against Policy & what I have heard that Labour promised in their Manifesto & Labour has not suspended him. I'm sorry if you think I have gone off topic, James! Note too self: Howie must stay on topic............... Naughty Howie Howie'
  • Score: 0

1:40am Sat 28 Jul 12

CM1 says...

Howie, you don't appear to understand the legislative role of the Local Planning Authority and Planning Committee. You cannot vote on Party lines, as the LPA is independant from the Council and has to vote on the merits of the application that it is considering. The Argus does not appear to understand this either, so you are certainly not alone!
Howie, you don't appear to understand the legislative role of the Local Planning Authority and Planning Committee. You cannot vote on Party lines, as the LPA is independant from the Council and has to vote on the merits of the application that it is considering. The Argus does not appear to understand this either, so you are certainly not alone! CM1
  • Score: 0

4:13am Sat 28 Jul 12

pinpong says...

Great. LOL. I also thought planning was non political and i think that the incinerator company is starting to build up lots of evidence for an appeal. The argus editor says a promise to stop the incinerator kept. Labour manifesto pledge to block incinerator and their committee dutifully vote it out.
BIG BIG BIG APPEAL COSTS ON THE WAY.
Great. LOL. I also thought planning was non political and i think that the incinerator company is starting to build up lots of evidence for an appeal. The argus editor says a promise to stop the incinerator kept. Labour manifesto pledge to block incinerator and their committee dutifully vote it out. BIG BIG BIG APPEAL COSTS ON THE WAY. pinpong
  • Score: 0

4:13am Sat 28 Jul 12

pinpong says...

Great. LOL. I also thought planning was non political and i think that the incinerator company is starting to build up lots of evidence for an appeal. The argus editor says a promise to stop the incinerator kept. Labour manifesto pledge to block incinerator and their committee dutifully vote it out.
BIG BIG BIG APPEAL COSTS ON THE WAY.
Great. LOL. I also thought planning was non political and i think that the incinerator company is starting to build up lots of evidence for an appeal. The argus editor says a promise to stop the incinerator kept. Labour manifesto pledge to block incinerator and their committee dutifully vote it out. BIG BIG BIG APPEAL COSTS ON THE WAY. pinpong
  • Score: 0

9:21am Sat 28 Jul 12

Howie' says...

CM1 wrote:
Howie, you don't appear to understand the legislative role of the Local Planning Authority and Planning Committee. You cannot vote on Party lines, as the LPA is independant from the Council and has to vote on the merits of the application that it is considering. The Argus does not appear to understand this either, so you are certainly not alone!
Thanks CM1, your right I did not know that.
[quote][p][bold]CM1[/bold] wrote: Howie, you don't appear to understand the legislative role of the Local Planning Authority and Planning Committee. You cannot vote on Party lines, as the LPA is independant from the Council and has to vote on the merits of the application that it is considering. The Argus does not appear to understand this either, so you are certainly not alone![/p][/quote]Thanks CM1, your right I did not know that. Howie'
  • Score: 0

9:32am Sat 28 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

To all - How do you think a non-political Planning Committee can be set-up in a politically controlled council.? It is political and is the same in every authority under political control. Also it is not independent from the council - where did you get that daft idea?
To all - How do you think a non-political Planning Committee can be set-up in a politically controlled council.? It is political and is the same in every authority under political control. Also it is not independent from the council - where did you get that daft idea? james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

11:26am Sat 28 Jul 12

Howie' says...

james.dyer7@ntlworld
.com
wrote:
To all - How do you think a non-political Planning Committee can be set-up in a politically controlled council.? It is political and is the same in every authority under political control. Also it is not independent from the council - where did you get that daft idea?
James, I hate to labour the point but I am somewhat confused now. Would Cllr Miqdad Al-Nuaimi have been expected, as a Labour Cllr to have followed the party line?
[quote][p][bold]james.dyer7@ntlworld .com[/bold] wrote: To all - How do you think a non-political Planning Committee can be set-up in a politically controlled council.? It is political and is the same in every authority under political control. Also it is not independent from the council - where did you get that daft idea?[/p][/quote]James, I hate to labour the point but I am somewhat confused now. Would Cllr Miqdad Al-Nuaimi have been expected, as a Labour Cllr to have followed the party line? Howie'
  • Score: 0

11:28am Sat 28 Jul 12

james jackson says...

I think CM1 meant it is "independent", rather than independent from, the Council.
Mr Dyer is correct. In essence, it's not possible to be politically neutral, no matter how hard you try.
However, there are rules and mostly planning committees try to follow them. Prejudice will abound, however, and the "not in my ward" triumphs whether people like it or not.
That's why it's difficult for a ward councillor to be in favour/or against a particular application in their own ward.
No matter which way the councillor votes, it will upset someone, and if people have good memories, they will turn them out at the next election, for their treachery.
Planning committees can be influenced though and sometimes officers' recommendations aren't always the best. Sometimes the people do know better.
But with the incinerator, something stinks and Newport people should demand answers..
I think CM1 meant it is "independent", rather than independent from, the Council. Mr Dyer is correct. In essence, it's not possible to be politically neutral, no matter how hard you try. However, there are rules and mostly planning committees try to follow them. Prejudice will abound, however, and the "not in my ward" triumphs whether people like it or not. That's why it's difficult for a ward councillor to be in favour/or against a particular application in their own ward. No matter which way the councillor votes, it will upset someone, and if people have good memories, they will turn them out at the next election, for their treachery. Planning committees can be influenced though and sometimes officers' recommendations aren't always the best. Sometimes the people do know better. But with the incinerator, something stinks and Newport people should demand answers.. james jackson
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Sat 28 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Howie - It depends whether they put a three-lined whip on it. Yes i suppose he was expected to vote against.

James Jackson - Don't understand. It is clear to me what will happen. There will be an appeal and the council will lose. They know that NOW. BUT they can turn round to the objectors and their wards and say 'well we tried didn't we. Don't blame us'. A common political ploy for councillors. Forget the cost eh!!!!
Howie - It depends whether they put a three-lined whip on it. Yes i suppose he was expected to vote against. James Jackson - Don't understand. It is clear to me what will happen. There will be an appeal and the council will lose. They know that NOW. BUT they can turn round to the objectors and their wards and say 'well we tried didn't we. Don't blame us'. A common political ploy for councillors. Forget the cost eh!!!! james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Sat 28 Jul 12

james jackson says...

Yes, James there will be an appeal I'm sure. And what you say is right, all councillors use that excuse. We tried, but somebody else over-ruled us!

Just one point: There can be no three-line whip on planning or licensing.
Some political parties try this, though whether it ever needs to be spoken, I don't know, but he issue is, they all know they shouldn't.
Yes, James there will be an appeal I'm sure. And what you say is right, all councillors use that excuse. We tried, but somebody else over-ruled us! Just one point: There can be no three-line whip on planning or licensing. Some political parties try this, though whether it ever needs to be spoken, I don't know, but he issue is, they all know they shouldn't. james jackson
  • Score: 0

1:28pm Sat 28 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

JJ - Yes i know but they do have them for whatever committee, unless you know different. Fascinating stuff local politics. Small big cheeses in a big pond eh
JJ - Yes i know but they do have them for whatever committee, unless you know different. Fascinating stuff local politics. Small big cheeses in a big pond eh james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

9:39pm Sat 28 Jul 12

CM1 says...

No probs Howie.

Re other comments; whether you choose to believe that Members on the Planning Committee vote along Party lines is up to you and, on that basis, a matter of opinion. However, the LPA is independent and decisions need to be made on the basis of planning law and policy. That is just a fact.
No probs Howie. Re other comments; whether you choose to believe that Members on the Planning Committee vote along Party lines is up to you and, on that basis, a matter of opinion. However, the LPA is independent and decisions need to be made on the basis of planning law and policy. That is just a fact. CM1
  • Score: 0

9:49pm Sat 28 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

CMI - Yes that is a fact but in practice not always the case. If that was the case in the Incinerator they would have voted for it. All the surveys indicate that and will form the basis of an appeal, which will succeed if it is lodged. Most planning applications are pretty straightforward but you get 'big' uns now and then. This is when party politics come into play so forget about planning law CMI. If you think the LPA is independent you must have led a sheltered life.
CMI - Yes that is a fact but in practice not always the case. If that was the case in the Incinerator they would have voted for it. All the surveys indicate that and will form the basis of an appeal, which will succeed if it is lodged. Most planning applications are pretty straightforward but you get 'big' uns now and then. This is when party politics come into play so forget about planning law CMI. If you think the LPA is independent you must have led a sheltered life. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

11:34pm Sat 28 Jul 12

CM1 says...

I didn't say what I thought; just gave the facts, so that the Argus' slightly misleading slant on this story, whether deliberate or otherwise, was given a little perspective. If you want to know my opinion...Councillor
s often do not understand planning law and the basis of the important decisions they are asked to make; decisions are often made in ignorance and personal interest.
I didn't say what I thought; just gave the facts, so that the Argus' slightly misleading slant on this story, whether deliberate or otherwise, was given a little perspective. If you want to know my opinion...Councillor s often do not understand planning law and the basis of the important decisions they are asked to make; decisions are often made in ignorance and personal interest. CM1
  • Score: 0

3:50pm Sun 29 Jul 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

cmi - comments noted
cmi - comments noted james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

12:46pm Wed 1 Aug 12

Cwmderi says...

Didn't Cllr. Bright put something in the Labour Party manifesto that they would oppose this plan. If so, then it would follow that the whole Labour group on NCC who attended the planning committee would have had 'closed minds' and as such, should have declared their interest and taken no part in the debate or the voting on this planning application.
Not sure how they were advised by their Head of Legal Services on this matter but they do appear to have left themselves wide open to a possible penalties and investigation by the Ombudsman for Wales.
I understand that Planning committees are an Independent body of the council but it is clear that the controlling Labour group have campaigned against this application and I have no doubt that the legal profession will have many bumper pay days in the months to come and that will be paid out of local taxpayers rates.
Does anyone kmow if there are any financial penalty clauses for NCC in the decisions they have now taken?
Didn't Cllr. Bright put something in the Labour Party manifesto that they would oppose this plan. If so, then it would follow that the whole Labour group on NCC who attended the planning committee would have had 'closed minds' and as such, should have declared their interest and taken no part in the debate or the voting on this planning application. Not sure how they were advised by their Head of Legal Services on this matter but they do appear to have left themselves wide open to a possible penalties and investigation by the Ombudsman for Wales. I understand that Planning committees are an Independent body of the council but it is clear that the controlling Labour group have campaigned against this application and I have no doubt that the legal profession will have many bumper pay days in the months to come and that will be paid out of local taxpayers rates. Does anyone kmow if there are any financial penalty clauses for NCC in the decisions they have now taken? Cwmderi
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Wed 1 Aug 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

Cwmderi - yes its a farce and Al Nuami's letter today defending the planning committee is a tripe. Yes they will have to pay the costs with such a strong case for approval. Serves them right but they do know the consequences and are making a sop to defend their election position.
Cwmderi - yes its a farce and Al Nuami's letter today defending the planning committee is a tripe. Yes they will have to pay the costs with such a strong case for approval. Serves them right but they do know the consequences and are making a sop to defend their election position. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

2:33am Sun 5 Aug 12

BishtonVoice says...

I have read more rubbish posted on this site than would be available to burn in an incinerator. Incidentally one of the key economic arguments against incineration is that black bag waste flows are in headlong decline and Newport taxpayers would have to compensate an incinerator company for 25 years under a ruinous PFI-type contract drawn up under the previous Council if they fail to supply enough "fuel" ie non-recyclable waste to feed the monster.
None of you seem to be aware that the laws on views taken by councillors on planning committees were changed earlier this year by Eric Pickles’ famous Localism Act. This actually allows a much greater degree of freedom to Councillors to hold and express views which might previously have been held to be prejudicial to their role on a planning committee. Provided Councillors do not close their minds entirely to other viewpoints they are now free to hold and express such “prejudices” - in other words they are free to express and take account of the views of the voters who elected them, including in this case the unanimous views opposing the incinerator of virtually every single Community and Town Council in Eastern Newport and South West Monmouthshire, and most of the electorate.
I attended the Planning Committee and they actually rejected the application on lawful, carefully selected PLANNING grounds, designed to stand up in appeal. So the question of paying penal costs should certainly not arise. I agree that the Argus leader was a bit off beam in mentioning the Labour manifesto - and I guess its understandable that readers may follow that lead without realising that this was NOT a factor at the Planning Committee where there was cross party consensus of Conservative, Labour and Independent Councillors who were all strongly and rationally opposed to the application, with the single exception of Cllr Al-Nuami who IMHO appeared only to have digested the officers highly biased assessment. He gave no specific arguments to counter the detailed PLANNING grounds against the incinerator application (eg conflict with wildlife designations, conflict with Glan Llyn, conflict with rules for a flood risk area and underestimated effects of HGV flows) identified by the meeting as the strongest grounds for rejecting the application.
Having read the comments from those posting on the site I am left with the question – do you support the construction of an expensive incinerator under PFI rules by a foreign-based multinational right next to the Gwent levels and Glan Llyn when there are alternative sites and alternative waste treatment systems available which are made in UK and are far cheaper, far healthier and far more sensitive to the environment – and can even supply energy from gasification ? It is a slam dunk when you look at all the arguments. Do you want to risk your children or grandchildren losing an average 6-12 months of their lives because of being brought up near an incinerator which we sat back and let them build ? This issue is far more important than what any individual Councillor thinks, or what we think of them, or what advantage each political Party may or may not derive, or which one to blame (or praise). It’s about stopping the incinerator to protect our people and our City. We do not want to become the incinerator capital of South Wales. Full stop.
I have read more rubbish posted on this site than would be available to burn in an incinerator. Incidentally one of the key economic arguments against incineration is that black bag waste flows are in headlong decline and Newport taxpayers would have to compensate an incinerator company for 25 years under a ruinous PFI-type contract drawn up under the previous Council if they fail to supply enough "fuel" ie non-recyclable waste to feed the monster. None of you seem to be aware that the laws on views taken by councillors on planning committees were changed earlier this year by Eric Pickles’ famous Localism Act. This actually allows a much greater degree of freedom to Councillors to hold and express views which might previously have been held to be prejudicial to their role on a planning committee. Provided Councillors do not close their minds entirely to other viewpoints they are now free to hold and express such “prejudices” - in other words they are free to express and take account of the views of the voters who elected them, including in this case the unanimous views opposing the incinerator of virtually every single Community and Town Council in Eastern Newport and South West Monmouthshire, and most of the electorate. I attended the Planning Committee and they actually rejected the application on lawful, carefully selected PLANNING grounds, designed to stand up in appeal. So the question of paying penal costs should certainly not arise. I agree that the Argus leader was a bit off beam in mentioning the Labour manifesto - and I guess its understandable that readers may follow that lead without realising that this was NOT a factor at the Planning Committee where there was cross party consensus of Conservative, Labour and Independent Councillors who were all strongly and rationally opposed to the application, with the single exception of Cllr Al-Nuami who IMHO appeared only to have digested the officers highly biased assessment. He gave no specific arguments to counter the detailed PLANNING grounds against the incinerator application (eg conflict with wildlife designations, conflict with Glan Llyn, conflict with rules for a flood risk area and underestimated effects of HGV flows) identified by the meeting as the strongest grounds for rejecting the application. Having read the comments from those posting on the site I am left with the question – do you support the construction of an expensive incinerator under PFI rules by a foreign-based multinational right next to the Gwent levels and Glan Llyn when there are alternative sites and alternative waste treatment systems available which are made in UK and are far cheaper, far healthier and far more sensitive to the environment – and can even supply energy from gasification ? It is a slam dunk when you look at all the arguments. Do you want to risk your children or grandchildren losing an average 6-12 months of their lives because of being brought up near an incinerator which we sat back and let them build ? This issue is far more important than what any individual Councillor thinks, or what we think of them, or what advantage each political Party may or may not derive, or which one to blame (or praise). It’s about stopping the incinerator to protect our people and our City. We do not want to become the incinerator capital of South Wales. Full stop. BishtonVoice
  • Score: 0

5:36am Sun 5 Aug 12

james.dyer7@ntlworld.com says...

bishton voice - Good points you make,some of which i never knew. In fact they are so good i think i recognise who you are. Well done Peter.
bishton voice - Good points you make,some of which i never knew. In fact they are so good i think i recognise who you are. Well done Peter. james.dyer7@ntlworld.com
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree