1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142 
DoE to tighten waste disposal controls
Page 26
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• The development of a strong national trade association could lead to better machinery whereby the trade itself could respond to criticism and, where appropriate, take the necessary action against its own defaulting members, said Mr Eldon Griffiths, Under-Secretary DoE, when he told MPs last week of plans to tighten controls on the disposal of toxic waste.
He said his Department was joining forces with the National Association of Waste Disposal Contractors and the Institution of Chemical Engineers in working on a further code of conduct for adoption by industries producing wastes, contractors moving them and the tip operators.
He had also asked the Association to scrutinize the tipping and checking procedures in use by its members in the light of the allegations which had been made.
More powers needed Mr Griffiths said that the Department was concerting a series of measures which would go far towards overcoming the worrying problem of dangerous waste disposal, but additional statutory powers would be needed.
These might be interim measures, pending the comprehensive Bill which the Environment Secretary intended to introduce to cover the whole range of pollution. Outlining the measures which the Department is now taking, Mr Griffiths said that one of the areas being dealt with was transport.
Recent incidents had revealed the need for more effective controls and better notification procedures covering the carriage of chemicals, including toxic wastes, whether at sea or on the land.
His Department was in close touch with other Departments and, as appropriate, with domestic industry, with a view to improving what he and Mr Walker accepted as an unsatisfactory position.
Wolston tip Mr Griffiths was replying to a debate opened by Mr William Price (Lab, Rugby), who went into detail about the events at Wolston tip, where alleged tipping of cyanide started off the present controversy over waste disposal.
Wolston, said Mr Price, was only the tip of an iceberg of cyanide, and with that and other toxic materials we were. building up for future generations a series of tragedies which would appal even those who had made a fortune out of waste disposal.
It had been estimated that 500,000 tons of solid toxic wastes were produced each year. Most firms had little or no control over the material once it left their premises, and many had no idea where it was going.
What concerned him most, if the allegations about Wolston were true, on a tip which had been well run and supervised, was what was going on at hundreds of tips on which anyone could go at any time of the day or night?
How much fly tipping was being carried out, even at Wolston, asked Mr Price. How many loads were being incorrectly described on delivery notes?
Just how much fiddling had been going on? Nobody knew.
This was big business, said Mr Price. Huge fortunes had been made and were being made by some doubtful people, who were running organizations of a somewhat dubious nature.
There had been no concern for the futui e safety of our people. Why not? It was easy to answer that question. Wiley was involved.