Several members of the waste, local authority and engineering sectors have written to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), calling on government to reconsider its decision to withdraw funding for ‘three major residual waste projects’.

The open letter, sent to Defra and various news outlets such as The Times, The Independent, The Daily Telegraph and Resource today (7 August),warns that the decision to withdraw £217.1 million of funding to three private finance initiative (PFI) waste infrastructure projects could ‘damage the confidence of investors in the waste sector’ and harm the UK’s ability to meet its EU landfill targets.

Defra announced in February that it was to withdraw funding from three major projects, claiming that the 29 PFI projects it had already invested in were ‘sufficient’ to meet the EU’s 2020 landfill diversion targets. The projects affected were:

• Merseyside Waste and Recycling Authority’s Covanta/SITA UK CHP project (£90 million in PFI credits);
• North Yorkshire County Council and the City of York Council’s Allerton Waste Recovery Park project (£65 million in PFI credits); and
• Bradford and Calderdale councils’ Bowling Back Lane CHP plant (£62.1 million in PFI credits).

The decision is now the subject of a judicial review from two of the three affected parties.

Artist's impression of PRR's Bradford plant

Government used ‘out of date’ data

According to the signatories of the letter (Nick Baveystock, Director General of the Institution of Civil Engineers; Barry Dennis, Director General of the Environmental Services Association; Steve Kent, President of the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning & Transport; Phil Moore, President of the Local Government Technical Advisers Group; and Steve Lee, Chief Executive of the Chartered Institute of Wastes Management), the decision was flawed, as the data used by the government to make ‘recent crucial investment decisions’ has now been ‘shown to be out of date’.

It cites recent (incomplete) figures from WasteDataFlow suggesting that ‘more waste is being collected by local authorities across the country, recycling rates are flattening and residual waste levels are on the rise’. It should be noted that this dataset is not complete and so may not be indicative of the final picture in England.

However, the signatories claim that these partial figures suggest that the government’s withdrawal of funding is ‘short-sighted’. They go on to warn that the withdrawal of funding could ’pose a genuine risk’ to the UK’s ability to meet its obligations to reduce landfill usage by the end of the decade.

The letter reads: ‘2020, when the UK has to meet strict targets on the amount of rubbish it sends to landfill, is no longer on the distant horizon, and like all major infrastructure projects, waste schemes take years to come to fruition and cannot be brought on stream at a moment’s notice. Rather than dismissing warnings from the very organisations that are at the sharp end of implementing their policies, ministers should recognise that the government’s commitment to long-term funding for infrastructure, and the UK’s strategy to stop waste being sent to landfill, are in peril.’

‘Disastrous consequences’

The letter follows on from several sent to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Owen Paterson, by Steve Kent, in his capacity as President of trade body ADEPT (the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport).

The first, dated 19 June 2013, warns Paterson that withdrawing funding for waste treatment programmes could have ‘disastrous consequences… in the affected areas’.

The second letter, dated 23 July 2013, acknowledges that the ‘negative impact’ on the UK’s reputation for delivering new infrastructure affected by the withdrawal of funding ‘has been recognised within government’. The most recent letter notes that ‘there has been no formal response from the Secretary of State to either of the previous letters’.

Concluding, the signatories urge government to ‘confirm its commitment now to the existing infrastructure programme’ and ’review the situation urgently to provide assurance – and evidence – that the UK will be properly equipped to meet its European Landfill Directive targets in seven year’s time.’

Speaking of the letter, CIWM’s Chief Executive Steve Lee told Resource: “Today’s letter is by no means the first time that concern about future funding and provision of waste infrastructure has been flagged up. Just last week, CIWM published a report on the export of waste derived fuels and the lack of UK infrastructure that exists currently to capitalise on this energy resource here in the UK.

“Other voices in the waste and resource management sector have highlighted significant challenges around the funding landscape and investor confidence, and there have been some very different views expressed publicly about future treatment capacity projections and data. The annual data to be released later this year will provide a clearer picture, as will CIWM’s Autumn report on commercial and industrial waste capacity, and we will be urging Defra to come to the table and engage in a constructive dialogue to address these concerns.”

Overcapacity

Despite the letter’s warning of rising municipal waste levels, a recent Eunomia report claimed that the UK could in fact face a 12 million tonne per annum shortfall in the amount of waste needed to feed the growing number of residual waste treatment facilities, fuelling concerns that incineration plants in the UK may have to burn recyclable material in order to make up the shortfall.

Read the open letter to Defra and more about Defra’s decision to withdraw PFI credits.