Bowes Labour: "Neither Pinkham Way nor Edmonton - but the London Borough of Barnet!"

Link to 'Your Bowes councillors'
Alan Sitkin, Yasemin Brett, Achilleas Georgiou

"Enfield's Bowes Labour Councillors are deeply concerned by the proposed facility, and have been making their reservations known. We simply do not believe that Pinkham Way should be used as a waste management site.

"By the same token, and given that Edmonton has suffered its own plant and incinerator for decades, we also firmly believe that no other site in Enfield should be considered as an alternative."

"As residents know, your Bowes Labour councillors have been working non-stop on the Pinkham files for a long time, digging up all relevant facts - past and present - that strengthen our efforts to counter the parties that want to see the NLWA waste plant located here.

Our strategy from the very beginning has been that you need your councillors to do the kind of background research and political work that complements the more public demonstrations being organised, for instance, by fellow travellers such as the Pinkham Way Alliance.

Our position is, and has always been, clear. For decades now, Enfield as a whole has borne more than its fair share of the burden of processing North London's waste. The usual explanation for this shameful imbalance - the fact that land prices are cheaper here than in Central London - does not satisfy us. Indeed, it is one of the flaws of uncontrolled market capitalism that the well-to-do force their ecological nuisances on to less wealthy neighbours, ostensibly because it costs less. As Labour activists driven by the deepest possible belief that all men and women deserve equal and fair treatment, regardless of their wealth or background, we find this situation immoral, and oppose it vehemently.

At this point, however, it is also crucial to agree that fairness for Enfield cannot only apply to the southwestern part of the borough - starting with Bowes ward, which suffered the blight of the North Circular Road for decades, before the recent improvements, that we've been driving. Indeed, it would be wrong for us not to also consider the position of our neighbours in Edmonton, who for decades have had an NLWA plant on their doorstep. Justice for Enfield means that neither Bowes nor anywhere in the East of the borough should be further burdened with the mountains of waste that North London produces (a problem that your councillors are also working on, but that's another story).

Thus, the only fair solution is that another NLWA borough step up. In turn, this raises the question of why NLWA chose the Pinkham Way site in the first place, instead of, for instance, somewhere deeper in... the London Borough of Barnet. After all, Barnet is also close to an orbital road, and has land prices that are also lower than in Central London. Above all, it doesn't have a waste plant like Enfield already has in Edmonton.

Barnet is already the driver behind most of the Pinkham Way project, making money by selling the land to Haringey, for the purposes of lodging its fleet of refuse lorries there, and hoping to make more money by selling its Mill Hill lorry depot site to luxury property developers. Moreover, in Brent Cross/Staples Corner, Barnet has a site that would be better for situating the waste plant, i.e. a location that is close to transportation links, but further away from housing.

So why didn't NLWA decide to locate the new plant in Brent Cross? To understand this, we need to go back to the NLWA's actual acquisition of the Pinkham Way site.

This happened - in autumn 2009. When Enfield was run by the Conservatives. When Barnet was run by the Conservatives. When Enfield-Southgate had a Conservative MP (still the same, David Burrowes).

One would have expected all these members of the same party to cooperate during the NLWA's site survey, to protect citizens living near Pinkham Way. Surely they should have examined the Staples Corner/Brent Cross site; decided to locate both the lorry depot and the waste plant there if it had enough space; or if not (the files contain vague references to difficulties with CPOs), put the plant there, and kept the depot in Mill Hill.

Surely, Enfield's leading Tories (Mr. Burrowes, plus Conservative councillors sitting at the time on the NLWA Board) could have stopped their friends in Barnet's Conservative administration, from making money off property sales, while forcing their waste on our borough. But they didn't. They pretend to complain now, but the horses have already bolted. It's easy to be on the side of the angels, when things are already settled - but where were they when it counted?

We cannot speculate on why Enfield's Tories did not force Barnet's Tories to assume their responsibilities in 2009, during the site selection process. But one thing is certain - if they even tried, they failed miserably.

The truth of the matter is that when Enfield Labour took over the Council in May 2010, we inherited a fait accompli, where the NLWA had already purchased the Pinkham Way site, for the express purpose of building a plant-cum-depot there - and stood to lose a lot of money, if it did not complete the project.

We need to be clear on this point. Unless an alternative solution is found, Pinkham Way is the concrete outcome, already on the cards when we arrived in power (explaining why it already figured as a waste plant in interim planning documents, a reality shamefully misrepresented, and politicised, by Mr. Burrowes in recent correspondence).

The first obstacle in our search for alternatives is the very real threat expressed by some parties that if Pinkham Way does not go ahead, East Enfield will be saddled with yet another plant, due to the unavoidable need to expand capacities somewhere. This false choice is totally unacceptable.

Much as your Bowes Labour councillors are entirely opposed to Pinkham Way, we also oppose East Enfield suffering further martyrdom, on behalf of the rest of North London. All the more so, because of fears that concentrating this great a volume of waste in one area would require the use of burners, an environmentally-unfriendly technology, that we do not wish to see (including for our own health, when the wind blows westwards)

We are all together in this - Bowes and East Enfield. At a certain level, this is a deeply moral issue. Other NLWA members - led by Barnet - must finally assume their responsibilities.

Is it too late? Is there enough unallocated land left at Brent Cross/Staples Corner to house the MBT plant? (And the lorry depot, which could otherwise stay in Mill Hill?) Is there enough time before NLWA's 2014 deadline to explore alternative sites in Barnet, or Haringey, or elsewhere? This is the constructive action that we as your councillors are working on at present.

Alongside of this, and as mentioned, we support public opposition, although to be effective it must be remembered that Enfield is a mere consultant in this whole process, with the final decision regarding Pinkham Way lying with Haringey's Planning Committee. What we do not support is the phoniness of Enfield Tories, who oppose Pinkham Way loudly, only now that it may be too late.

The second constructive action is therefore for local residents to press the MP and his councillor sidekicks, to finally exert some real influence on their fellow Tories in Barnet. This is crucial - ask Messers Burrowes, Lamprecht, et. al. why they aren't using their party connections to defend their constituency. They've failed so far. To redeem themselves, and earn the right to hold their heads high, they need to succeed. We can only hope that it's not too late.

Similarly, all fair-minded Enfieldans (from Bowes or elsewhere) must also reject calls - coming from certain Tories, but disappointingly also from one leading local Green politician - that Edmonton or East Enfield be made to suffer any further in our stead. This is not only a false choice, but morally wrong. Pinkham Way is a political issue but also a question of values. We seek justice for all of Enfield, and indeed the whole of North London.

Fairness should have been the guiding principle in 2009, when this case was largely decided. It wasn't. Now that Enfield has a Labour administration, we will ensure that fairness lies at the heart of the process. Again, we can only hope that it's not too late."

---

(Links above, to other web sites, have been added by us.)
An 'Enfield Conservatives' response to this document is here.

---

Our comment:  
We believe all incineration should be phased out, and certainly that no new plant should be built, anywhere in the UK. 

Barnet Council has already granted outline planning permission for a waste plant, and an incinerator (with a 140-metre chimney) at Brent Cross. 

This uses one site on the A5 Edgware Road, south of Staples Corner, and - joined by a conveyor belt under the Thameslink railway line - a second site near Brent Cross shopping centre. 

The current Hendon rail transfer station would close:
Click above for:

"NLWA considers Pinkham Way due to 
opposition at Brent Cross (September 2010)" 

Most immediately affected would be residents and schools in the London Borough of Brent - which is, conveniently, not part of the 'North London Waste Authority'!

---

Link to Enfield Conservatives' Response, 
or link to HOME (show all posts).