smartphone orten software here handy ortung russland mspy auf iphone 6s Plus installieren spy cam app iphone 6s Plus handy kindersicherung internet vergleich sms spy yahoo
Skip navigation.
... for greater sustainability and local resilience

Comment and Discussion

Here you can put forward your thought and ideas, ask questions and comment on any subject connected you like, but hopefully with some connection to Transition, Peak Oil or Climate Change.

To add a topic click on 'add new comment'
To reply to an item, click on 'reply' at the bottom of the item

30Apr - 6May: Incinerator Enquiry

Hi All,

Although today, 6th May, should be the last day at Kingsley until July12th, I will be reporting on the site visits next week.

The inspector opened today proceedings by announcing once again that the
Inquiry after this week will resume on Tuesday 13th July at 2pm at Kingsley
and will continue until the 16th July. Final Submissions will be conducted
at the old Restormel Offices in St.Austell on 28th,,29th, and 30th July.
The inspector then announced that Mr Moorland-Smith is getting married on
Saturday and following his usual humorous comments wished him best wishes
for the future.
The inspector followed this by announcing that Mrs Rickard will shortly be
having an operation and gave his best wishes for her operation and
recovery(also after his usual humorous comments)

Then followed Mr Coulson being questioned by the inspector which incl.
subjects such as the topography of the site, Planning approval for waste
tipping, yes.(This is not true),height of stack,did admit to some negatives.
Why dont you put it in a hole, none was available(not true).
Mr Phillips then led Mr Coulson with usual biased questions which prompted
the required answers.No change here.

Crib was taken at 11.10 until 11.30am

Mr Trehy(Cultural Heritage) was then called as SITA 's next witness. After
presentation of his POE he was led by Mr Phillips with usual format.
Unbelievable statements being made, do'nt they know we know different. Could
not get his POE correct, confusion with his comments and docs. not a good
Lunch 12.40 to 1.40pm.
Mr Phillips continued leading Mr Trehy. Another case of a fat consultancy
fee blinkering the truth. Big issue made of parish boundary stones and
alterations. Plenty of time wasting instigated by Mr Phillips. Another SITA
witness who will be going away with a long nose.

Mr Trehy was then X examined by Mr King. usual searching questions. do you
agree with what Mr Coulson agreed that his evidence was based on the need as
advised by others, answer yes.Mr Coulson agreed that this was the wrong
course to take. You have not taken conservation into consideration, answer
no. Mr King obtained more admissions, he is the master of this. An
intervention by Mr Phillips was not accepted by Mr King. disagreement on
some subjects involving English Heritage. We had a 20 min break at 3.40pm
to give the inspector the time to telephone the EA to obtain info. on
conditions which the EA are proposing to attach to the operating permit.
They would not tell him. He has now asked for a draft permit indicating the
conditions it is proposing to attach to it for the purpose of informing the
Secretary of State to assist with his decision making, to be with him by
Tuesday 13th July.
Mr King resumed with Mr Trehy, some dis-agreements and some agreements,
after a struggle. Mr King obtained more admissions.(only by hard work). Mr
Trehy certainly knows how to say yes in 30 or 40 words.
5 min break at 4.55pm to give Mr Cole time to prepare
Mr Trehy was then X examined by Mr Cole. who then corrected many
inaccuracies in Mr Trehy's evidence and highlighted that a significant
report (AGHV) is missing and a further inaccuracy.
This was an interesting exchange involving two people with similar
qualifications. a toe to toe contest. Mr Coles X examination highlighted
many inaccuracies. many searching questions.Many fair comments. discussions
on Cornish hedges and surveys.

It is fair to say that Mr Trehy was given a tough time through out this
exchange by Mr King who no doubt won on points and Mr Cole by utilising his
expertise to, gave his usual polished performance. No doubt who won on

I would like to take this opportunity to record my sincere thanks to all
those who have supported our campaign by way of their attendance at Kingsley
and all members of Rule 6 parties, including Mr Paul Matthews who have
performed with the best of their ability to give what only can be described
as excellent performances in support of our campaign to reject SITA's
planning application appeal. I have been very privileged to have been part
of that campaign.

As a reminder, the Public Inquiry, after tomorrows morning's session will
resume again on July 13th at 2pm at Kingsley, when SITA witnesses Mr Penfold
(transport) and Mr Greenwood (Planning) will present Proofs of Evidence
which will be subject to X examination. This will continue until the 16th

Attendance today 40 in total..

SITE VISITS INFO. Tuesday 12th May as planned but now with following
amendment, Mrs Salmon(Jackie) to meet with inspectors group at Working Men's
Club car park at 9am. To clarify Haul Road arrangements also for Tuesday
the group is limited to five people as registered with Imerys works manager.
Wednesday 13th May is as planned and circulated yesterday. Thursday 14th May
is confirmed as external sites near and far, Myself and Brian Arthur have
been asked to accompany the group.


Hi All, 5-5-10

Today the inspector opened proceedings by stating that he would be meeting
with Mr Daly, Mr Greenwood, and Mr Rickard to finalise details of site
visits for next week at lunch time, also that Mr Penfold would not be
available this week, in view of this there will be no proceedings on Friday
this week. New arrangements have been made for Mr Penfold's and Mr
Greenwood's evidence to be given on 13th,14th 15th and 16th of
Kingsley. Arrangements have now been made for the presentations of final
submissions to take place on 28th, 29th and 30th of July at the old
Restormel Offices in St.Austell.

Mr Phillips introduced Mr Gary Coulson, of Terence O' Rourke Ltd., SITA
witness on Landscape and Visual impact, who then proceeded to present his
proof of evidence. Mr Coulson was then led by Mr Phillips with the usual
pattern of questions This continued over a long period. Its content was not
agreed by people attending and it will no doubt be subject to later X

Crib was taken at 11 to 11.10am

Continuation of Mr Coulson's leading by Mr Phillips carried on until 12.10pm
Footpaths, photomontages, visual impacts, photographs, were subjects
presented in detail including critism of evidence submitted by Rule 6
parties and other private parties.

Mr King then X examined Mr Coulson in his usual style with positive
questions and highlighting discrepancies in his evidence and his methods of
compiling that evidence. Mr King certainly tore into Mr Coulson and made him
admit to discrepancies and agree with Mr Kings assessments which ridiculed
many parts of his evidence. One very relevant admission from Mr Coulson was
that his evidence was based on need and this was influenced by others,
others being SITA people and SITA witnesses.. Exchanges got a bit aggressive
at times with Mr King insisting on relevant answers. Nobody a sleep during
this session. quite lively and interesting.
Lunch was taken between 1 and 2pm. The inspector met with Mr Daly, Mr
Greenwood and Mr Rickard to discuss and agree details for the site visits at Details to be circulated ASAP after arrangements have been
Mr King continued with his X examination of Mr Coulson resulting in much
conflict and lack of answering the questions correctly. Needed intervention
from the inspector to put Mr Coulson on the correct wavelength(in his
place). some apologies from Mr Coulson. Mr Coulsons remark that this
proposed building would improve the visual impact was challenged for obvious
reasons.Finally admitted that there will be an adverse effect. More
admissions from a struggling Mr Coulson who had his evidence torn to pieces
Break for coffee at 3 to 3.30pm. (It pays to get there first as the
inspector is very fond of the custard creams)
Mr King resumed with Mr Coulson. It was agreed that the CERC building will
harm rather than enhance visual impact. More telling questions which
resulted in more admissions which greatly differ from evidence. All very
A break was taken at 4.50pm to allow Mr R Cole, PC/Stig to prepare to X
examine Mr Coulson, which then followed. Mr Cole gave his usual assured
performance and highlighted many questionable issues. Proved that there are
discrepancies in statements regarding site selection. Did not rec..answers
to relevant questions, got some don't nos. Mr Cole asked very searching
questions which highlighted his knowledge of this witness subject. Mr
Coulson struggled to answer. some intervention from Mr Phillips all to no
avail. Mr Cole still made his point all very good stuff. Scored some good
points on planning issues and other subjects incl. loss of hedges. landscape
character issues, ancient enclosed land issues were explained. Mr Cole did
not agree with certain answers. Many questions to be referred to Mr Trehy
tomorrow. Mr Coulson could not answer many questions on his own subject.
Admission, SITA 's original PA photomontages were incorrect Good
performance from Mr Cole. certainly won on points.
In a nut shell Mr Coulson's evidence presented in the morning was completely
destroyed initially by Mr King and later by Mr Cole. Statements wrong, facts
wrong, drawings wrong,drawings misleading, all proven.

Poor Mr Coulson had a torrid time today and no doubt was glad when it
finished. Top marks to Mr King for his X examination this was classy stuff
and to Mr Cole for his strong examination. No doubt who won hands down
Proceedings closed at 6.05pm. attendance today reached 42 in total at
Sadly today was the first day my wife has missed, not too well.

Ken. =

Hi All, 4-5-10

The inspector started todays proceedings at 9.30am by stating we now start
day 25 by continuing with Mr Dennis SITA Noise witness followed by Prof
Bridges SITA witness on health.

We then continued with the inspector asking Mr Dennis questions on noise. Mr
Dennis did his best to convince that there would not be any noise limits
because of the mitigation proposed.This was then followed by Mr Phillips
leading Mr.Dennis with the usual slanted questions as expected. Mr Dennis
endorsed some of his previous unacceptable to us, statements. Too biased to
record again. This guy certainly comes from another planet. disgusting
comment again about proposed mitigation would improve conditions at La Mont.
(slight reaction from the audience) no wonder.
Crib was taken at 10.55 to 11.10am.

Prof. Bridges then proceeded to read his evidence followed by being X
examined by Mr Moorland-Smith SITA QC. subjects commented on were dioxins,
HPA, chemicals, modern incinerators emissions, combustion emissions, health
perceptions, Prof Howard's evidence only provoked discussion.
Rod Toms POC then proceeded to X examined Prof. Bridges. Questions resulted
in defining that Prof Bridges has never been a practitioner and is not a
qualified doctor. lot of his work is with animals experiments. Also admitted
that he is not a chemist. He is a research scientist. Mr Toms highlighted
the precautionary principle as advised by certain experts. many exchanges on
this subject. too many to record.
ASA doc.SITA leaflet, HPA statement highlighted and agreed. limitations on
control of variables, agreed. perception of risk ie is a reality, perceived
leading to real. He can understand that the mitigation proposed at La Mont
would effect the quality of life. there would be an effect on health. stress
would effect health. Mr Toms prompted some good admissions. some "beg to
differ" s. physiological effects were discussed in depth. China Clay Dust,
Parsons report was referred to. China Clay dust and incinerator emission
have not been ever subject to any actual in combination assessment was

Mr Toms gave his usual very technical and well informed X examination
resulting in a professional performance which I am not sure if Prof. Bridges
expected. He certainly did not expect such a grilling. This was a good
battle(exchange). In my opinion Mr Toms won on points.
Lunch was taken at 12.50 to 1.50pm.

Prof. Bridges was then X examined by Ms Hawken,CSWN, This proceeded a
question and answer session with Mrs Hawken's usual style of presenting and
An intervention by Mr Moorland-Smith clarified that modelling was carried
out on a 120 mtr stack. Some very good questions which Prof. Bridges
answered, some with clarity and others with I am not a scientist I am a
toxicologist. For this reason he would not answer all health questions.
(Surely a health witness should be able to answer all health questions)
Mrs Hawken certainly gave Prof Bridges a hard time, he certainly knew he had
been in a fight.
Afternoon break 2.55 to 3.05pm
Prof. Bridges was then X examined by Miss Amanda Routledge, PC/STIG. who
presented positive and searching questions. subjects covered were dioxins,
monitoring of emissions, municipal waste, black bag contents, modelling is
never perfect. phycological effect cannot go away, site position, traffic
pollution would not improve air quality, nor would incinerator emissions.
did you help with modelling, took SITA data at face value, cannot guarantee
that no human will be effected. Good constructive performance from Miss
Prof. Bridges was then X examined by Mr Paul Matthews, you are a
toxicologist, yes. many positive, searching and well presented questions
asked as only Mr Matthews can. here again Mr Bridges was made to work hard.
Safety thresholds, food contamination PCBs, many technical discussions took
place too many to record and too technical for me. One point that was
established was that when a problem arises regulation then follows. many
subjects were presented and discussed in some length. Health being
prominent. Public concern. highlighted the fact that Prof. Bridges has said
that the people of St.Dennis show mass hysteria. Made some very valid
points. got many answers which he wanted. No doubt Mr Matthews has carried
out much research. Highlighted Prof. Bridges past involvement with other
organisations also Maggie Thurgood's involvement with DEFRA and the waste
local plan, and subsequently the contract with SITA. Unfortunately the
inspector called a halt to Mr Matthews X examination because of the time
factor before Mr Matthews had completed his prepared questions, much to his
disproval and protest at what he called being gagged.

Prof. Bridges was then asked questions by the inspector, this was followed
by questions by Mr Moorland-Smith SITA QC which as usual were biased in
favour of SITA.

Prof. Bridges certainly had to work hard today, I am sure he was not
expecting such a grilling. He was not expecting such a technical content
examination, In my opinion we just shaded it today. It was a hard days work
for both sides. It was a pity it was not witnessed by more people.
Proceedings closed at 4.50PM

SITE VISITS, confirmation of dates, Tuesday 11 May, will be visits to the
Haul Road, Footpaths and the Goss Moor.
Wednesday 12
May, will be visits to St.Dennis properties, photograph positions and
vantage points
Thursday 13
May, will be visits to Recycling centres, landfill site, Hallenbeagle and
Moorswater sites.

These details are all that is confirmed to date. It is hoped that the
inspector will be finalising details on Wednesday, such as times and meeting
places etc.
The Balloon has been arranged for 11 & 12 May.

Attendance today 35 in total.


Hi All,

The inspector opened today with a statement about procedures which he would
be adopting regarding submissions to PINS etc.

Mr Phillips, SITA QC then proceeded to intro. Mr Dennis SITA witness
(Noise),who then followed this by his presentation of Proof of Evidence.
This was followed by questions from Mr Phillips. Highlighted mitigation
measures which would be taken to protect local properties from noise arising
from the incinerator construction and during operation. More new SITA docs
circulated today. (how many more I wonder and why is this allowed). Many
ongoing amendments needed on this POE. various graphs were explained as was
the guidance and methods used to compose them. This was of the biggest loads
of biased reporting we have witnessed. sexed up is too polite.
Crib at 10.55 to 11.05am.
Mr King then proceeded to X examine Mr Dennis. he got Mr Dennis to admit the
noise exceedence can be a reason for planning refusal. Mr Dennis are you
saying that the proposed mitigation(improvements) would improve the quality
of life at La Mont, yes.(what a pillock). Examination now geared up to some
level of aggression from Mr King.
Mr King made the following statement, quite frankly Mr Dennis I certainly do
not understand your position and I will mention it in my closing
Mr King made some very good points and extracted some uncomfortable answers
and omissions on his methodology from Mr Dennis. Also admitted some
terminology recorded was misleading. A thorough X examination by Mr King,
with searching questions resulting in drawing out answers and agreements
which he wanted to hear.(did'nt we all)
This was a good battle and won by Mr King.

Mr Dennis was then X examined by Mrs Blanchard (PC/STIG). This was a good
tussle with searching questions which were met with negative answers and no
real admissions.
Mr Dennis again stated that mitigation to properties at La Mont would be an
improvement. Mrs Blanchard begged to differ, as did those attending. Mr
Dennis's answers on mitigation boarded on the ridiculous and were nowhere
near reality. As far as some of Mr Dennis's answers were concerned I could
not believe it came from a fellow human being, This was a very good
performance by Mrs Blanchard.
No doubt today has been our day.

Todays session closed at 1.30 pm as planned.

Next session will be on TUESDAY 4TH MAY at when Mr Dennis will be
asked questions by the inspector and Mr Phillips followed by Prof. James
Bridges (Health Effects from Emissions to Atmosphere) as SITA's next

Poor attendance today about 35 in total.

Have a good weekend,