Debate on the Annual Business Plan 2010 (P.117/2009): Amendment 17, Paragraph 5
Click here to see the full Hansard of this debate. It is Item 11, the second item after lunch.
This Amendment forced TTS to remove all types of hazardous waste from the waste being fed into the Bellozanne incinerator.
Ministers in the Business Plan had wanted this removal to be subject to the introduction of environmental taxes.
|POUR: 35||CONTRE: 13||ABSTAIN: 0|
|Senator S. Syvret||Senator T.A. Le Sueur|
|Senator B.E. Shenton||Senator P.F. Routier|
|Senator J.L. Perchard||Senator P.F.C. Ozouf|
|Senator A. Breckon||Senator T.J. Le Main|
|SenatorS.C.Ferguson||Senator A.J.D. Maclean|
|Senator B.I. Le Marquand||Connétable of Grouville|
|Connétable ofSt. Helier||Connétable of St. Brelade|
|Connétable of Trinity||Connétable of St. Peter|
|Connétable ofSt. John||Deputy J.A.N. Le Fondré (L)|
|Connétable of St. Saviour||Deputy of Trinity|
|Connétable ofSt.Clement||Deputy K.C. Lewis (S)|
|Connétable of St. Lawrence||Deputy I.J. Gorst (C)|
|Connétable of St. Mary||Deputy E.J. Noel (L)|
|Deputy R.C. Duhamel (S)|
|Deputy ofSt. Martin|
|Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier (S)|
|Deputy J.B. Fox (H)|
|Deputy G.P. Southern (H)|
|Deputy of St. Ouen|
|Deputy of Grouville|
|Deputy of St. Peter|
|Deputy J.A. Hilton (H)|
|Deputy P.V.F. Le Claire (H)|
|Deputy S.S.P.A. Power (B)|
|Deputy S. Pitman (H)|
|Deputy of St. John|
|Deputy M. Tadier (B)|
|Deputy of St. Mary|
|Deputy T.M. Pitman (H)|
|Deputy A.T. Dupré (C)|
|Deputy T.A. Vallois (S)|
|Deputy M.R. Higgins (H)|
|Deputy A.K.F. Green (H)|
|Deputy D. De Sousa (H)|
|Deputy J.M. Maçon (S)|
to give a flavour of the debate and to explain this amendment, here are some edited extracts:
I will be ashamed to be a States Member if this amendment does not go through. I think Members will have a very, very hard time explaining to Islanders if they reject this.
The Transport and Technical Services Department’s success criterion (iv) on page 33 says: “The most harmful elements of the waste stream (e.g. TVs, electrical goods, end-of-life vehicles) should be segregated for recycling subject to the approval of environmental taxes by the States” and on my copy of the Business Plan as I have read that, I have put a very large “no”:
This is quite simply unacceptable. The removal of the most harmful elements from the waste stream is non-negotiable. It does not wait on this Assembly to make up its mind on environmental taxes.
……………. I put the question to the Chief Minister yesterday of his views for the environment, I cannot recall his exact words, but he did say he supported the environment. Therefore, I would expect him, in fact, to stand up and support this proposition. I am surprised that he is opposed to it ………..
Deputy le Claire
………………. When it comes to commensurate income line, I argue quite strongly, if we take out the most harmful – the most harmful – things that are entering the waste stream, if they are removed, then the commensurate savings will be felt and achieved in Health. …………..
Like the smoking strategy, it was not very popular when we introduced it, but the subsequent savings more than saw off the loss of revenue from he income from the sale of cigarettes. So, there is a mantra these days: “The wise money; the smart money is on green” and that is where we have to put our money in the future. We have to go environmental. …………..
……………. If the Minister for Treasury and Resources, heaven forfend, should fall under a number 15 bus tonight and be replaced by somebody else who is less keen, will we see those environmental taxes? Perhaps not. If he brings a package of environmental taxes which involve principles that we as a House object to, perhaps those environmental taxes do not get through the House and do not get passed. If that were to happen then we would not be sorting this noxious material, the heavy metals that get into our system, highly dangerous, highly toxic, highly poisonous, from the system because we have decided that this is the way forward. No guarantees. What the Minister has done is he has given himself a get-out clause. The possibility that these things will not be removed from the waste stream and the Deputy of St. Mary was absolutely correct when he said that this is not negotiable; this has to happen.
Deputy Shona Pitman
………………… In the aims of the Health and Social Services Department, their stated aim is to improve the health and social wellbeing of the population of Jersey through the provision of high quality services. To suggest that we should have to wait to approve environmental taxes to remove harmful elements from our waste stream makes this statement absolutely meaningless ……….
Constable Juliette Gallichan
………………. If, when it comes to the vote on those (i.e. environmental taxes), I cannot support them and if by some chance I am in the majority, I do not want that to be a reason for not doing what we do now and segregating. Simply, the bald fact is – and here I agree with Deputy Southern – if we do not do environmental taxes we will have to find another way to do it, but we have to do it and, as I see it, the Deputy of St. Mary’s amendment takes away the uncertainty. …………