Waste facility is a toxic bog
DESPITE no rain for some days, this morning I still had to wade through thick, glutinous mud, mixed with who knows what toxic sludge, to dispose of various items for recycling at the island's principal site at Longue Hougue.
Because, despite everything else, no one in control of this site – States departments, civil servants, deputies or whoever else has control of it – seems to think that Longue Hougue should have a clean, hard, concrete base – a base that could actually be cleaned properly now and again.
But no, this site, which is used by thousands of members of the public each week trying their hardest to recycle using this facility, continues to be a toxic, semi-bog land area. I wonder how many other people are simply put off by the mud, grot, potholes, puddles, toxic ooze, etc and therefore just fly tip their stuff elsewhere?
Then, on returning home, I read in your esteemed publication on page seven that the examiners of HGV learner lorry drivers, who must number but only a few, are to be offered an 'extra (new) hard standing area (at the Longue Hougue site)' to carry out their duties. Jolly good for them, but what about us, the other many thousands? Are we to continue to wade through the mud at Longue Hougue forever?
Might I suggest that someone somewhere in authority has got their priorities wrong?
IAN DAISH,
La Petite Jaoniere,
Water Lanes,
St Peter Port,
GY1 2ED.
Editor's footnote: Public Services recycling officer Shelley Nicholls responds: 'The Longue Hougue recycling facility is very popular and well-used. However, it is, and always has been, a temporary site. We are aware it is not always ideal, but we are not in a position to spend several tens of thousands of pounds hard surfacing an area that will have a relatively short lifespan and which isn't particularly needed most of the year.
As part of the new waste-management facilities being planned at Longue Hougue, the current temporary site will be replaced with a more purpose-built one. That will hopefully address any concerns your correspondent has raised. In the meantime, we apologise to any site users who are inconvenienced by the site conditions during the wetter months. Based on visitor numbers, we have not seen any evidence this is putting people off going.'
