Convener of Public Petitions Committee replies to complaint by GAINS, 31 August 2011
David Stewart, Convener of the Public Petitions Committee, has sent the following reply to our complaint against the failure of the Committee to properly consider our petition for a ban on waste incineration. As you can see, Mr Stewart clearly sees no need to provide any sort of explanation for the Committee dismissing our petition in about 3 minutes flat.
– Green alternatives to incineration in Scotland
you know, the Public Petitions Committee considered your petition at its
meeting on 28 June 2011. I am
aware that the clerk, on behalf of the Committee, contacted you after that
meeting to notify you that the Committee had closed your petition.
My clerk advised that although the Committee saw clear merit in
some aspects of your petition, your call to “immediately ban the
construction of new waste incinerators and large biomass burners, and shut
all existing plants within 5 years” was, in the view of the Committee,
unrealistic and unachievable.
also know that the Clerk indicated that although the decision had been
taken by the Committee to close the petition, the Committee would be
willing to give consideration to any new petition you might wish to bring
forward that concentrated on the other issues of monitoring emissions and
accelerating the drive in Scotland to reduce and recycle.
your email of 22 July 2011 to me and other Members you stated that you did
not feel that you had been given a satisfactory reason for the Committee
having closed your petition. I
am sorry you feel this however the reason was simply that the Committee
was not prepared to call on the Scottish Government to shut all existing
waste incineration and biomass burning plants within five years.
should say that in summing up at that meeting it was inaccurate of me to
state that your petition was being closed on the basis of incompetence.
I fully accept that your petition was
competent. The decision to
close the petition was not taken on the grounds of incompetence but on the
basis that the view of the Committee was that it would just not be
practical to call for the closure within five years as sought by your
know that the clerk has indicated a willingness to discuss with you how
you might want to take matters forward and it may be that you will now
wish to take that offer up.
Public Petitions Committee