A massive illegal waste dump in Oxfordshire is set to be cleared by the Environment Agency at a cost of millions, sparking outrage from Labour MP Josh Simons, who claims his constituents in Greater Manchester have been living alongside 25,000 tonnes of toxic rubbish for nearly a year.
The site, which was dumped outside Kidlington village, posed an "overriding public imperative" due to the scale of the fire risk and its proximity to a primary school. The agency had initially refused to intervene under its policy of pursuing perpetrators and landowners, but ultimately decided to take action to prevent further harm.
Simons, who has been campaigning for his constituents in Wigan to receive similar treatment, was furious at the decision. "This decision throws mud in the face of my working-class constituents," he said. "I am so angry about it." He accused the agency of being selective in its actions and treating communities unfairly based on their socio-economic status.
The Environment Agency had said that clearing the waste would be done from making efficiencies in its operations, but this did not sit well with Simons. "What is not 'exceptional' about a toxic waste dump on fire right next to a primary school?" he asked. "Could it be because the kids and businesses are not in Oxfordshire?"
The issue of waste crime has been a growing concern, with reports suggesting that organised criminals are making millions every year from illegally dumping rubbish. The House of Lords environment and climate change committee had called for a "root and branch review" of responses to waste crime, but ministers rejected all recommendations.
Instead, the government will announce policies in the New Year aimed at driving criminality away from the waste sector. However, critics have accused the government of not doing enough to address the issue, particularly when it comes to holding those responsible for dumping toxic waste accountable.
The dumping in Kidlington and Wigan highlight a broader problem with selective enforcement by regulatory bodies. The Environment Agency's decision to clear the Oxfordshire site without making similar concessions to other communities raises questions about fairness and accountability.
The site, which was dumped outside Kidlington village, posed an "overriding public imperative" due to the scale of the fire risk and its proximity to a primary school. The agency had initially refused to intervene under its policy of pursuing perpetrators and landowners, but ultimately decided to take action to prevent further harm.
Simons, who has been campaigning for his constituents in Wigan to receive similar treatment, was furious at the decision. "This decision throws mud in the face of my working-class constituents," he said. "I am so angry about it." He accused the agency of being selective in its actions and treating communities unfairly based on their socio-economic status.
The Environment Agency had said that clearing the waste would be done from making efficiencies in its operations, but this did not sit well with Simons. "What is not 'exceptional' about a toxic waste dump on fire right next to a primary school?" he asked. "Could it be because the kids and businesses are not in Oxfordshire?"
The issue of waste crime has been a growing concern, with reports suggesting that organised criminals are making millions every year from illegally dumping rubbish. The House of Lords environment and climate change committee had called for a "root and branch review" of responses to waste crime, but ministers rejected all recommendations.
Instead, the government will announce policies in the New Year aimed at driving criminality away from the waste sector. However, critics have accused the government of not doing enough to address the issue, particularly when it comes to holding those responsible for dumping toxic waste accountable.
The dumping in Kidlington and Wigan highlight a broader problem with selective enforcement by regulatory bodies. The Environment Agency's decision to clear the Oxfordshire site without making similar concessions to other communities raises questions about fairness and accountability.
And it's not like the agency was being unreasonable in its decision to clear the site, right? I mean, we can't have a primary school next to a burning waste dump, that'd be insane! 
The thing is, it does make you wonder if there's some kind of unfairness at play here... like, why didn't they do the same for Wigan? 
. It's just another example of how the system can be all messed up when it comes to dealing with waste crime. I get that Josh Simons is upset because his constituents are being affected by this dump, and honestly who wouldn't be? But it's not like he's the only one making a fuss about this stuff 
.
. And let's not forget, this stuff can have serious health consequences for people living near these dumps.
.
... like, who needs 25k tonnes of toxic rubbish just chillin' next to a primary school? 
It's all about priorities I guess 
... but what about Wigan? 
Why is Josh Simons so salty though 
... or maybe he's really passionate about fairness and accountability 
... either way, this whole thing needs to get sorted ASAP 
It seems like an easy target for criticism, but the agency's decision is actually a step in the right direction. 25k tonnes of toxic waste is not something you can just 'get over' 
They're making a huge effort to prevent harm and it's refreshing to see them taking action. The lack of resources might be the reason they couldn't intervene sooner, but that doesn't mean they're being unfair. 
But at the same time, it does seem like the Environment Agency was being kinda selective about who they helped first.
I wish they'd just come clean and tell us how much is going on behind the scenes. 