Tuesday, June 25, 2024

“My conscience wouldn’t allow another Buncefield” says planning chief

THE CHAIR of Thurrock’s planning committee has countered questions over his leadership by the Tory opposition over the controversial lorry park in West Thurrock.

Leader of the Tories and member of the planning committee, cllr Phil Anderson has called on the Labour bosses to consider whether cllr Hipsey is the best person to lead the planning committee after a planning inquiry went against cllr Hipsey’s proposal to close the Titan Works lorry park in 28 days.

The inspectorate decided that the lorry park may remain open until 2015.

Speaking to YT, cllr Hispey remains unrepentant. He said: “Let us be clear on a number of matters. There is a COMAH (hazardous chemicals) site in there. Next to it is three hundred lorries or more, not very far from homes and schools.

“My conscience is clear and I have done my best to try and safeguard the people of West Thurrock, who are entitled to sleep easily in their beds.

“I know that if another Buncefield happens that I can also rest easy in that regard.”

Cllr Hispey added: “It does seem a bit strange that it is cllr Anderson’s colleagues in Westminster who are behind the Localism Bill. A bill that wants to see the wishes of the people heard.

“However it seems strange that here we have a petition signed by 2000 residents and he seems to want to ignore this.”

Cllr Hipsey was also heard on BBC Essex this morning.



  1. I was listening to BBC Essex this morning whilst councilor Hipsey was for the residents and I am truly astounded that the radio presenter didn’t pick up the significance of this lorry park being in the boundaries of a tier one comah site
    Also Councilor Anderson when you make a public statement please have the common decency to tell the truth you stated if this lorry park was closed down you would have to do something about the three hundred lorries. This is total fiction the truth is there is 112 lorry parking spaces on this site for drive by lorries the rest are pre-contractual there for it brings over two hundred lorries in to the borough unnecessary. Another statement you made you didn’t think it was fair this company had to pay out for upgrades in its planning conditions over the next three months as set out by the planning inspectorate the reason being “you said its unfair this company has to pay out this money when it has to close in 4 years “ I think your find the comments you made on the radio this morning have must certainly now predetermined you on any decision making process regarding this company and yourself
    Let me do some math’s for you councilor Anderson 325 spaces for HGVs at £15.00 a night comes to £4,875 per night for this company multiply that by 365 which amounts to £1,779,375 multiply that again for running it illegally for 4 years total amount £7,117,500 to add more insult this company are not paying the correct amount of rates no 106 money no planning application money no building control and do exactly has they wish and you feel sorry for this company and you feel they have been mistreated What about every one that listened to your interview this morning I feel sorry for the members of the public with your very economic rendition of the truth if any think I have stated is incorrect please reply by blog and correct me I would like to repeat it is my opinion by what you blogged last week on your thurrock and what your comments were on the radio this morning you are clearly pre determined with any process to do with this company please comment

  2. Well said Cllr Hipsey. At least the people of Thurrock can look to this one brave man for standing up for the residents of West Thurrock which is why they rightly put their trust and faith in electing Labour Councillors to replace the useless lot that were there before. I listened to the radio interviews of Cllr Phil Anderson and Cllr Terry Hipsey and think it would have been a much more useful exercise for there to have been a debate between these two councillors. BBC Essex you missed a great opportunity! I am glad Terry Hipsey had the strength of conviction to have identified the “Buncefield like risk” which is obviously posed by the existence of an unauthorised lorry park in close proximity to a tier one Control of Major and Hazardous substances (COMAH) site. I had not thought of that aspect and hope the Planning Inspector was aware of this factor when making his decision? It appears that Thurrock Council may have allowed the owners of this site Industrial Chemicals Group to get away with opening and operating an unauthorised lorry park whilst at the same time using the adjacent and neighbouring sites presumably also within their ownership to continue their usual activities of producing chemicals. It beggars belief that ICG have been allowed to operate a lorry park with some three hundred lorries parked, containing diesel and other inflammatory substances so close to such hazardous chemical production and within the minimum exclusion zone within which there should be no development such as a lorry park. Well done Mr Hipsey for your foresight and care for the residents of West Thurrock.
    As for Councillor Anderson I think that the listeners of Radio Essex should have been given all of the facts regarding the matter of where all the lorry traffic would have gone had the planning inspectorate upheld a 28 day notice. The fact that some 75% of the HGV traffic at the Titan Lorry Park situated at the old West Thurrock Power Station site is contractually booked HGV traffic and that but for this contractual arrangement would not need to be parked there anyway. Therefore if the Planning Inspector had chose to uphold the 28 day enforcement notice the companies to who these lorries and trailers belong would have simply been required to find somewhere else to park their vehicles when not in use instead of the unauthorised site at the old West Thurrock Power Station site. It is therefore not true that these 300 or so lorries catered for by this site would have been parked up at the side of the street in residential areas! One major operator at the unauthorised site distributes all over the UK and therefore it is believed would have had the resources to relocate their contractual HGV traffic elsewhere. The point that appears to have been missed even perhaps by Thurrock Council themselves is that this site has always added to the problem of HGV traffic coming into the area and never provided a solution to the real predicament in this area posed by ever increasing levels of HGV traffic coming into the Borough and that is to cater for transiting or footloose HGV traffic. It is such transiting HGV traffic that is the cause of the real problem namely lorry drivers choosing to park in lay-bys or residential areas, that the Titan lorry park was never primarily designed to tackle. The unauthorised Titan lorry park has only ever provided 25% of its spaces to help combat the real problem for the borough of transiting or footloose traffic driving through the borough. It is such footloose HGV traffic that has to stop in Thurrock for either legal reasons or out of preference given its close proximity to the south coast ports and to London and other areas within the east of London Thames Gateway area, that needs to be catered for and not the traffic brought into the area by ICG’s commercial and contractual enterprises, a large proportion of which does not necessarily have to be parked on their site in West Thurrock anyway.
    The 25% footloose traffic could park at the Moto Services site situated between junctions 30 and 31 of the M25. One of the lorry drivers interviewed in Radio Essex’s breakfast show this morning of the 23rd August 2011 wrongly claimed that the Moto site only allows lorries to park for two to three hours, when in actual fact it is open 24/7. No doubt Moto just like ICG charge for lorries to park on their site but the difference is that Moto bothered to apply for planning permission to accommodate some 80plus HGVs parking on their site unlike ICG and probably unlike ICG were required to pay s106 developer contributions. Therefore the Moto site would have been able to cater for the 25% of footloose HGV traffic displaced by the closing down of ICG Ltd’s unauthorised site. Why didn’t Cllr Anderson mention such facts? Thurrock Council should be doing the job of addressing the ever growing transiting or footloose HGV traffic coming to and through the borough by finding and opening a lorry park that ticks all the boxes with new Government policy of locating such HGV parking sites near to the major trunk roads instead of slap bang in the middle of an industrial estate and having to come past a regionally significant out of town shopping centre known as Lakeside. Then perhaps the residents of Thurrock can finally have some rest from this ever increasing blight on their lives.
    Furthermore why have ICG irresponsibly been allowed to get away with opening and operating a lorry park and contracting with other companies to park vehicles on their unauthorised site when they know that they do not have planning permission? Why didn’t the Local Authority insist that ICG submit a planning application to the Development Corporation and comply with the other requirements applicable to any planning application such as s106 contributions for starters? Every other commercial enterprise in the area has to comply with these requirements so why was the same not required of ICG? Fundamental questions that remain unanswered by Councillor Anderson, other Tory members and perhaps more appropriately officers at Thurrock Council. Are there answers out there and forthcoming any time soon?

  3. if there was a fire either in Vopak or ICG both comah sites how AN EARTH COULD YOU evacuate these two sites with 320 just on ICG alone and I don’t know how many in the other companies along Oliver road as the co-op I’m sure have a distribution centre in Oliver road and all the other Companies that have countless Lorries you don’t know what chemicals are on ICG land what effects it could have on members of the public if it becomes airborne? Imagine the entire area full of smoke and explosion then the fire services ambulance and the police all trying to evacuate Oliver road devastation or what where are the brains . Moreover they called the former mayor Judas Surly they should be called the JUDAS PARTY for selling the residents and their children out for donation off this company and their offices. It’s all illegally built but Cllr Anderson god forbid there was an explosion Thurrock council will be held responsible all the residents that live in close proximity to this site and the school could be in grave danger but all the time it has never been spoken about in the public arena. Thank god we have councilor Hipsey who has the common sense to look at the bigger picture and what’s more has gone on the radio to air his concerns(WELL DONE SIR) I remember when the government said there would be no more comah sites near residential area yet Thurrock council allows hundreds of unfortunate lorry drivers to sleep on a comah site it may as well be a small residential estate if they are sleeping in the lorries FACT this council commissioned a group called the HGV working group in 3 years they couldn’t find a suitable lorry park well I think my 12 year old daughter could have done a better job. OH I FORGOT Joy Redsell did suggest to this committee that ICG must give a presentation (for her own gain and the Tory Group ) its only because the labor party Cllr smith said this would not be appropriate behavior towards the other lorry parks. But the Tory group asked other sites in to make the numbers up so it look good (is that right Joy Ben Garry) this told to the government inspectorate by a former Tory Member offered under oath and we allow the Tory group to make decision about our well being and health I don’t think so if you have ever voted for them in the past like myself I’m ashamed to admit DONT because they have let our communities down because even if it was a minority in their group the other stood absentmindedly by and watched it and never declared the immoral going on in the group

  4. Pat Smith
    You really are Not expecting any of the named councillors to reply to you ARE YOU? they need to find another scape goat first. Councillor Anderson & all then others in his group are not interested in you or the voting public, they have what they wanted. All they are doing now is trying to protect their future ( retirement plans)
    I for one would sign any petition that is brought to my door. If it states two things


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here


More articles