NEWS May 15 2002
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The PRIVATE Sector

Toxic waste okay for kids, says Welsh Assembly
Campaigners against plans to build two schools on sites contaminated with toxic waste in Wales
suffered a major setback recently when the Welsh Assembly rejected a motion to have such planning applications scrutinised by health authorities.

In Llandudno, Conwy, a secondary school, Ysgol John Bright, is to be moved from its current site, which the council is selling to Walmart/Asda for a new supermarket, to the site of an old gasworks, which is known to be contaminated with heavy metals, waste oil and explosive levels of methane. Meanwhile in Newport, Durham Road Infant and Junior School, which has outgrown its current premises, is being transferred to the site of a former municipal waste dump, which locals remember was previously used by Monsanto for dumping drums of – well, nobody is quite sure what, but apparently when soil samples were taken from the site there were some small explosions. Monsanto cannot actually be held responsible for cleaning up the site as there is no official record of their dumping. An alternative, relatively uncontaminated site had been proposed for the new school, but after soil testing Newport council decided to sell the clean site to housing developers and put the school and accompanying nursery on the toxic waste dump. Both new schools are to be built under PFI. Parents and local people opposed to the plans have met with a complete lack of sympathy from local councils, who insist the sites are safe without presenting any hard evidence or funding any serious investigation. (see previous news updates on this subject at  http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/news/toxic_waste_1.html and  http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/news/private_sector_toxic.html).

The Assembly motion, introduced by Gareth Jones of Plaid Cymru, would have required councils to consult health authorities before building schools on sites which had been judged too contaminated for housing – a simple and sensible measure, one would have thought, especially since no formal consideration of the health consequences of building on these contaminated sites has been carried out in either Conwy or Newport. However, the records of the debate in the Welsh Assembly show otherwise.
Gareth Jones and other Assembly Members (AMs) who supported the motion were met by a fog of obfuscation and attempted diversion. One member claimed she had consulted with Conwy council on the issue nad they were satisfied the site was safe – but they hadn’t investigated the health risks. Anotehr challenged the motion on the grounds that Health Authorities in Wales are shortly to be replaced by Health Boards (so what?). The main thrust of the opposition, however, was to claim that this motion should not be passed because it was too ‘narrow’- the issue was being considered elsewhere and broader proposals would be put forward at a later date to provide a ‘holistic’ approach to health risks. Environment Minister Sue Essex announced that she would be seeting up a ‘task group’ But why not take this specific action now – make sure the health authority has a say on these two sites and any future similar circumstances, until proper comprehensive guidelines can be drawn up?

Campaigners have suggested an answer – as statutory consultees, health authorities would be entitled to see all relevant information, such as soil analyses of the sites, which is currently classed as commercially confidential. Lesley McCarthy, who is working on the campaign against re-building the two schools on the proposed sites, explained why this was such a problem, ‘We have been saying how contaminated the sites almost certainly are but have not had access to full soil analysis because it impacts on remediation strategy, therefore on costs, therefore it is “Commercially Confidential” or so said the councils.’ So, even such limited investigation as has been done cannot be subjected to independent analysis because it affects how much money corporations might have to spend. What seems to be the priority here – money or children’s health?
Contact: Lesley McCarthy, 02920 711232


Private Sector Links

World Bank support for private healthcare questioned – Bretton Woods Project  http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/topic/privatesector/p2807privhealth.html

CBI boss accused over hospital contracts - Independent  http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=287311
Surprise, surprise, Confederation of British Industry boss Digby Jones, PFI fan extraordinaire, is also director of a company providing IT services to the NHS under PFI…

'Private firms could get police role' – BBC  http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk_politics/newsid_1949000/1949827.stm
Private firms could take over some detention roles at police stations under plans being examined by the Home Office. Security guards could replace detention staff at police stations and their work could involve finger-printing suspects, taking DNA samples and carrying out intimate body searches.

Privatised halls of residence are pricing poor students out of accommodation – Unison  http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=73
Rents for privatised halls of residence accommodation have risen by up to 22%, prompting fears that students are being priced out of university, a new UNISON study has found. Rents at Southampton Institute’s halls of residence rose by 22% after privatisation. Students pay £78 per week, up from £55, the highest rents in the country.