North would be island’s ‘dumping ground’ yet again

I read with absolute horror this very recently publicised proposal to dump inert waste on Belle Greve Bay north. Once again, unfortunately, the States are trying to get a plan passed quickly and in an underhand way, by:

1. Allowing very little time for public consultation before the States vote on 13 December – to date, there has been very little in the way of discussions with residents and members of the general public (apart from poorly publicised invitation to a few people to view plans at Beau Sejour this weekend. All islanders should have been informed that they can, in fact attend).

2. Saying that other sites have been considered, most of which are, according to the States website, not suitable alternatives. I note also, that the majority of considered sites are in the north of the island; why are other parishes not being considered with equal measure? Isn’t it their turn now?

3. Not looking closely enough at other forms of waste recycling and disposal available to the island, both on and off island, in the way that other countries do. How hard have the States tried to achieve this? Or is it just easier not to bother and just make an executive decision to dump waste?

4. Deciding that, yet again, it is okay to target the north of the island as Guernsey’s dumping ground – quite literally. Not only is the north being squeezed for housing, but all people who are housed in the area will have to put up with 11-15 years of dust, air and noise pollution, as the site is filled. Air and noise pollution will certainly affect the whole of the bay, but, in addition, the prevailing south westerly winds will carry dust and noise much further to the northern end of the island.

5. Not clarifying at what times of the day this dumping would occur. Through the night, perhaps, as was the case with the Lagan lorries, or when the Longue Hougue area was first being reclaimed? Isn’t there enough noise and traffic in the immediate and wider area? Some might say that this is what one might expect from an industrial zone. However, this is also one of the more heavily populated districts on our island, with many families being able to afford only to live in St Sampson’s and the surrounding area. Such families will have no choice but to put up with noise and air pollution, as Housing are proposing to build many dwellings nearby.

6. Next: what do the States propose to actually do with the reclaimed land? Let me see... how about a sewage farm? Or an incinerator, perhaps? Highly likely that more heavy industry would appear, thereby being situated even closer than before to residential areas. I wonder what the elderly people in sheltered accommodation would feel about these possibilities... The possibilities are endless. Since Longue Hougue has been surreptitiously filled in more and more over the last 20 or more years, how do we know that the reclamation won’t creep further along the coast, despite deputies’ claims to the contrary?

If the States wish to gain any credibility from these proposals, I urge all members to listen to your electorate, deputies, and not just assume you know best. Engage with the population. Do nothing until you have the views of all. What is the need for such speed? Longue Hougue still has capacity. (Or is it because the L’Ancresse wall remains will need to be put somewhere?)

I also encourage all voters to add their various opinions by contacting the States and writing in to the Press, before it is too late.

D. GREEN,

Les Bas Courtils, St Sampson’s, GY2 4LJ.