The official version of this document can be found via the PDF button.
The below content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments.
Environment Scrutiny Panel
PUBLIC MEETING Record of Meeting
These minutes are Part A of a two part Agenda. Part B of the meeting was held in Private Session under Exemption 3.2.1(a)(xiv) of the Code of Practice on Public Access to Official Information
Date: 7th February 2008 Meeting Number: 71a
Present | Deputy R.C. Duhamel (Chairman) (RD) Connétable K. A. Le Brun of St Mary (KB) Deputy C. Scott Warr en (CSW) |
Apologies | Deputy P. V. F. Le Claire (PLC) |
Absent | Connétable A. S. Crowcroft (SC) |
In attendance | Mr M. Robbins, Scrutiny Officer Mr C. Ahier , Scrutiny Officer |
Ref Back | Agenda matter | Action |
1. | Minutes. The Panel approved its Minutes of both part A and part B of the meeting of 28th January 2008. RD. KLB. CSW. |
|
2. Item 1 15/01/08 Item 3a 28/01/08 Item 3d 28/01/08 | Matters arising. The Panel noted that the letters to the Minister for Planning and Environment and the Minister for Transport and Technical Services regarding the Waterfront had not yet been sent. The Panel noted that Direct Input would be contacted following confirmation of exhibition details. The Panel noted that further discussion regarding e-mail correspondence received from Mr. Ellison would be conducted under Item 6e of their agenda. The Panel noted that Channel 103 had informed the Scrutiny Office that they had spare capacity to assist the Panel as a result of the decision to put back the campaign to coincide with the March exhibition. | MR MR |
| The Panel received and noted e-mail correspondence from a member of the public. RD. KLB. CSW. |
|
3. | Confidentiality Agreement for Business Plan Process The Panel noted the confidentiality agreement and agreed that the Chairman should sign the document on behalf of the Panel. The Panel subsequently received copies of the Annual Business Plan documentation provided by the Treasury & Resources Department. The Panel noted the documentation distributed and agreed to consider them in detail at a future meeting. RD. KLB. CSW. | MR |
4. | Mont Orgueil Castle The Panel considered e-mail correspondence received from a member of the public regarding a planning application from the Jersey Heritage Trust in respect of Mont Orgueil Castle. It was noted that the Minister for Planning & Environment was the ultimate arbiter in such cases. The Panel discussed whether a resolution was likely be reached and, noting that individual cases could not be discussed, agreed to question the Minister for Planning & Environment on the generalities of decisions relating to Jersey Heritage sites. RD. KLB. CSW. | RD |
5. | Future Meetings. The Panel considered the additional meetings scheduled for 11th February 2008. It was agreed to invite the Minister and Assistant Minister for Transport & Technical Services and the Assistant Minister for Housing as one of the St/ Helier Deputies to attend upon the Panel at 2:30pm to consider composting and to stipulate that no Departmental Officers attend as the meeting would be at a political level only. The Panel further discussed forthcoming meeting dates and agreed that the dates in question should be confirmed to them as soon as possible. The Panel noted that the next meeting was scheduled to be at 9:30am on the 21st February in the Le Capelin Room, States Building. RD. KLB. CSW. | MR MR |
6. | Current Reviews Waste Plant Review |
|
|
The Panel received a paper updating them on progress with the Review. The Panel noted that the Chairman and Deputy Le Claire had met with the London based company First National Power who work with existing technology and had the capability to deal with residual waste. The Panel were further informed that First National Power had agreed to participate in the March Exhibition. The Chairman advised the Panel that he would be meeting with selected Connétable s the week commencing 10th February to discuss the outcomes of the meeting with First National Power. The Panel received notes from a meeting between Juniper and the Transport and Technical Services Department. The Panel further received an invoice (number 020808 dated 6th February) from Juniper relating to work recently undertaken upon the Panel's behalf. The Panel noted the record of the meeting and agreed to pay the invoice. The Panel further agreed to distribute the Juniper presentation to all Panel members. The Panel agreed that Juniper should be supplied with the OJEC Notice and the planning application documents submitted by the Transport and Technical Services Department.
The Panel were informed that no quote had yet been received from Direct Input Public Relations Advisers. The Panel noted that the presentations for the Exhibition needed to be completed. The Panel agreed that the presentations should minimise the audience's exposure to the technological aspects of the review in order to ensure the underlying issues were properly communicated. The Panel discussed the need for figures demonstrating the amount of electricity produced and the methods of dealing with residual waste. It was agreed to contact the participating companies/groups to confirm their attendance. It was further agreed to request publicity material from any companies/groups that were unable to attend for display at the event. | MR MR MR MR MR |
| c) 11:00am to receive Mr. D. Monier of Romi Recyclage' The Panel discussed the imminent meeting with Mr. Monier of Romi Recyclage'. Correspondence detailing the arranging of the meeting was distributed to the Panel and it was confirmed that the Panel had not paid for his visit. The Chairman welcomed Mr. Monier and apologised for the absence of Connétable Crowcroft and Deputy Le Claire. Mr. Monier was informed that a visit had been arranged to the St. Helier Parish works at the conclusion of the meeting. The Chairman informed Mr. Monier that whilst the Panel had no authority to make any waste re-cycling appointments the Panel were able to exert pressure on the relevant Department to try and bring about change to the Island's re-cycling policy. Mr. Monier confirmed that a former Scrutiny Panel had visited his firm approximately two years previously. It was further confirmed that a quote had been produced for processing 3,000 tonnes of cardboard at his French facilities. The Panel received a copy of the quote. The Chairman informed Mr. Monier of a letter to the Panel from the Department of Planning & Environment detailing a meeting in France with Romi Recyclage'. Mr. Monier informed the Panel that no such meeting took place, restated that the last meeting was in June 2005 and further stated that the most recent contact with the Department was in a telephone conversation approximately 3 months ago. Mr. Monier was informed that Jersey raised approximately 15,000 tonnes of paper and cardboard and was currently recycling approximately 50% of it. The Panel was informed that Romi Recyclage' currently shipped their paper and cardboard to China for processing. Mr. Monier confirmed that his firm would be able to deal with all of Jersey's cardboard and agreed to confirm such by letter. The Panel noted that whilst the capacity to deal with all the paper and cardboard waste was not an issue the price received for a greater capacity would not necessarily be greater as the margins on such a product were small. Mr. Monier confirmed that his company dealt with batteries and both domestic and industrial plastic. It was further confirmed that the plastic would need to be sorted |
|
| either pre or post baling for shipping. It was explained that it was more cost effective to sort pre baling and the baling could be done with existing machinery in Jersey or with a purpose built press. This one press would be able to bale both domestic and industrial plastic. The Panel confirmed that a magnet would be used to sort aluminium and other metal products. It was confirmed that most local metal for re-cycling was exported to Spain. Mr. Monier confirmed that he also shipped his metal to Spain. The Panel were informed that, as Romi Recyclage' were licensed to strip and shred cars, it would be possible to take complete vehicles from Jersey for processing subject to de-pollution being carried out in Jersey under regulation. Mr. Monier confirmed that he currently shredded 18,000 tonnes of rubber tyres per month in France and as such it would be possible to process any amount from Jersey. It was confirmed that a mobile shredder could be brought to Jersey periodically and that the tyres could be roughly shredded in preparation for shipping to France and the completion of the process. The Panel noted that the French tax applied to the dumping of waste (TGAP) was currently 8 Euros per tonnes. However the Government had announced that it would be raised to 40 Euros per tonnes in the future. It was further confirmed that a standard 40-60 Euros per tonnes handling charge was levied by the waste plants themselves. The Panel was informed that the sorting of waste was now greatly mechanised and as such no longer required the human resources it once had. Mr. Monier informed the Panel that Romi Recyclage' was able to deal with any waste except hazardous waste although should such a service be required he would be able to recommend a contact that would facilitate this. The Panel were informed that Romi Recyclage' had opened a shop that re-used or re-cycled computers and computer screens: approximately 50% were dismantled and 50% reused. It was further confirmed that 90% of television screens were recycled. Mr. Monier informed the Panel that the dismantling of screens had to be done to technical and safety requirements but that it would be possible to ship screens from Jersey for such dismantling. The Panel discussed the will at political level to create and improve links between Jersey and France and noted |
|
| that HD Ferries had offered freight opportunities to Mr. Monier. The Chairman thanked Mr. Monier for attending upon the Panel.
The Panel noted that no action had yet been taken on this issue and that the Scrutiny Office was awaiting input from Connétable Crowcroft before proceeding. The Panel noted that the advertising campaign had created various responses from members of the public in relation to the waste and other areas of the Panels work such as the Waterfront. It was considered that the cost of the campaign had been justified.
The Panel considered the e-mail correspondence and noted that Mr. Ellison had been informed that it was his choice whether or not to forward his letter to the Chief Minister. The Panel agreed that the Chairman should arrange a meeting with Mr. Ellison in order to discuss his concerns. RD. KLB. CSW. | SC/MR RD |
7. | Air Quality Review
The Panel noted that the Chairman had received a report by Professor Laxen and following consideration had requested that additional material be added.
The Panel noted the additional material for the report and agreed that they should give further consideration to it at a subsequent Panel meeting. RD. KLB. CSW. |
|