Waste firm Veolia could be asked to scrap its controversial plans for a £60 million incinerator in Shrewsbury following a confidential debate today – it is understood.
Councillors were due to discuss Shropshire Council’s position over a possible appeal by the company in an exempt section of a council meeting, after Veolia’s plans for the burner at Battlefield were turned down earlier this year.
It is understood that members of the full council are to be presented with several options to consider – including backing an appeal or asking the waste company to pull any plans for an appeal, and instead come up with an alternative.
One option is also understood to be that the council could tear up the 27-year waste contract with Veolia it signed in 2007, although this is thought to be highly unlikely to happen because of the millions of pounds it would cost to terminate it. If councillors do decide to support an appeal, it is believed the council could still be liable for a large proportion of the costs.
According to previous reports, Shropshire taxpayers could be landed with a bill of more than £1 million if an appeal goes ahead.
At the time it was claimed that under a clause in the contract signed with Veolia, the council would be forced to pay 90 per cent of the appeal costs, if a barrister decided that there was more than a 50 per cent chance of such an action being successful.
Shropshire Council has decided not to comment on the claims.
A planning application for the incinerator was rejected by the council’s strategic planning committee in September. But Veolia is considering an appeal against the decision.
The groups Safe Waste Shropshire and No Burners in Shropshire, which have campaigned against the controversial incinerator plans, have criticised the council for discussing the matter behind closed doors – despite it being of major public interest.
Nick Hall, from NOBIS, said: “Members of the press and the public will be excluded from attending this item.
“I feel that Shropshire Council is again hiding behind closed doors.”
Gareth Proffitt, spokesman for Shropshire Council, said: “The item is exempt as the paper contains commercially sensitive and legally privileged information.”
Catherine Slaytor, spokeswoman for Veolia, said the firm did not wish to comment on the matter as it was exempt.