Midlothian's waste is coming, but don't tell CELRA!

by DOUG COLLIE

A collection of confidential correspondence obtained via Freedom of Information has revealed the background to a highly controversial plan which would have resulted in 125,000 tonnes of Midlothian's household refuse being 'imported' for treatment in the Scottish Borders.

And emails generated during the preparation of a joint tender for the work by Scottish Borders Council and waste treatment contractors New Earth Solutions (NES) show efforts being made to keep the information about the Midlothian bid from residents living close to the Easter Langlee landfill site at Galashiels.

These events took place in 2011 and 2012, but hundreds of documents and thousands of emails associated with the council's disastrous liaison with NES were kept secret by a six-year confidentiality agreement signed by the parties when their partnership ended in abject failure in 2015.

The paperwork is now being released by SBC although the names of many of the individuals involved in the unsuccessful attempt to deliver a £23 million treatment plant at Easter Langlee to deal with Borders rubbish have been blacked out. The venture cost council taxpayers at least £2.4 million.

Emails show SBC and NES were working on their bid to dispose of and treat Midlothian's annual output of 25,000 tonnes of garbage only a month after the council signed a 24-year deal with NES in April 2011. 

If successful the Midlothian contract was expected to generate hundreds of thousands of pounds in revenue over five years for the joint bidders with the imported waste being landfilled until the ill-fated treatment plant was up and running.

Prior to a bidders' day organised by Midlothian Council, a redacted email written on May 11th 2011 said: "It just depends on the strategy and whether we maintain an element of surprise but not letting the competitors see NES there. We will also need to have a discussion around the commercial arrangements. 

"I appreciate that these need to work for both parties which would mean the Council receiving more than just the extra tonnage revenue going into Easter Langlee. I have met with officers this morning to have a brief discussion around commercial structure for the Council and we are agreed that this needs to be a win/win situation otherwise there is little point in pursuing the tender jointly."

Most if not all of the people living at Coopersknowe and that part of Easter Langlee closest to the council 'tip' had been strongly opposed when proposals to increase activity at the site was mooted in 2010 in the shape of a planning application from the council's own Technical Services Department, later joined by NES.

The Coopersknowe Residents Association - soon to become the Coopersknowe & Easter Langlee Residents' Association or CELRA - submitted written objections to the application in March 2010.

It was claimed the statement that there would be no increase in traffic did not account for future growth, consequent commercial activities arising from it and that recycling material would have to leave the site. 

The objectors contended: "Detailed traffic statements should be provided including projections and serious questions as to whether the [C-class] road is suitable for construction traffic and the volume and nature of traffic using it, with a range of issues including blind bends, lack of pavements and lighting, a pinch point, verge damage, camber the wrong way, narrowness at key points, and impacts on disabled access from existing houses.

"Dust and mud issues will be aggravated and vibration increased. There will be staff parking and visitor parking so there will be extra traffic and roads will further deteriorate. The road cannot cope and to suggest the number of HGVs wont increase is devious in the extreme."

But when the application came up for a decision on April 11th 2011 members of SBC planning committee gave the proposals the green light. The contract with NES was signed four days later.

There was clearly concerns within the council about how local residents might react to the prospect of an additional 25,000 tonnes of Midlothian waste passing their front doors should the joint bid succeed.

An email - again redacted and dated May 20th 2011 - warned: "Chaps, The Council has a meeting scheduled with CELRA on Monday, at present there is a risk that representatives from the Council may raise the point that NES/SBC will be bidding for Midlothian's waste.

"Obviously there were concerns raised at the meeting last week due to confidential/commercial issues amongst others. Can NES draft a note ASAP so that we can demonstrate to the Officers that we cannot divulge this information due to ........ (i.e. commercial/confidential matters etc.)

As soon as we have this we can brief the Officers/Councillors and demonstrate we have something on record to this effect."

A day later another email stated: "(Blank) has suggested that SBC/NES set up a 'war room' at Scott House with a representative from NES there. We will then be able to gather information on demand.”

However, relations between council and contractor as they developed their bid appear to have become strained fairly quickly.

A message copied to Ewan Doyle, the SBC officer in charge of the Easter Langlee project on May 23rd declared: "I am concerned that NES may not be fully committed to a bid with SBC and may only be going through the motions. They have still not come through with a formal offer to SBC yet."

And the following day an email from Mr Doyle included this passage: "If this is a joint bid then whatever NES put in it the Council are also liable to provide! NES could go out of business in 2 years and leave us in a situation with no waste treatment service (as we are going through retendering), but we still have to deliver to ML [Midlothian].

In a further email to Mr Doyle dated May 25th the sender wrote: "Personally I am not happy with the approach NES are using. I think it is too dis-jointed and messy, with a number of risks around the two separate drafting of documents being contradictory and thus increasing risks of lower scores and unknown risks to the Council. 

"NES clearly want to limit SBC's input and they are clearly not understanding our issue of exposure, they appear to have the 'wrong end of the stick' in relation to this and I cannot seem to get (blank) to accept this. If I did not know better I would suggest we maybe being managed out of the process. i.e. the Council withdraws due to frustration and unknown risks."

The bid saga would drag on until February 2012 when NES wrote to SBC's Rob Dickson to confirm that New Earth had received a contract award letter from Midlothian Council. The contract was for the disposal and treatment of all of Midlothian's residual waste for 15 years. with alternative landfill arrangements in place of Easter Langlee.

By 2016 NES Group was completely insolvent: the Borders facility was never built, and Midlothian made other arrangements on the waste treatment front.