Surfers plan action to fight five-year delay bid

ENVIRONMENTAL campaigners are upping the pressure on the States ahead of tomorrow's sewage debate. Public Services is under pressure over its proposal to put off for five years a decision on building a full treatment plant while a marine survey is carried out.

The Marine Conservation Society said yesterday that Guernsey was in danger of falling a generation behind the UK and Europe.

And Surfers Against Sewage will make its presence felt when the States debates the issue tomorrow.

'It's a big day for campaigners who want to see cleaner, safe water in Guernsey,' said SAS campaigns director Richard Hardy.

'We're hopeful that pressure perhaps from other departments will redress the approach Public Services has taken with non-decisions, fudging, to not want to implement full sewage treatment.'

SAS will be in action outside the Royal Court building from 8.45am.

'Hopefully being Halloween, Public Services will have a few treats in store for us. Otherwise, we will have a few tricks in store for them.'

The MCS questioned why Guernsey was not going for sewage treatment when the Isle of Man was spending £170m. on a facility.

'There's a £50m. price tag on a new treatment plant,' said MCS coastal pollution officer Thomas Bell.

'Apparently that's too expensive, although the Isle of Man is presently spending over three times that sum on its new facility. If Guernsey does not bring its treatment technology into the 21st century, then the island risks falling a generation behind advances in the UK and Europe.'

The group believes that modelling done in 2005 for the sewage Green Paper could be taken as evidence that beaches with a record of high faecal bacteria contamination were being affected by the sewage plume resulting from pumping through the main Belle Greve outfall and smaller ones at Fort George and the Creux Mahie.

But former Public Thoroughfares Committee president Peter Bougourd believes Public Services is going down the right route.

He dismissed suggestions that it was just repeating work.

'We did one or two bits and pieces to do with the island drainage plan, but it was nothing. Even if we had done it, which we haven't, it's now 20 or 30 years on. My understanding is the intention of the proposed survey is to understand the effect the outfall has had.'

He was in favour of the marine survey planned.

'No evidence has surfaced so far to show what we're doing is in any way harmful. It's painfully obvious to me the way the finances are, there are far more pressing things calling on our capital reserves than something that's apparently doing no harm.'