CAMPAIGNERS opposed to the controversial waste plant planned for Canterbury have told a panel of experts their fears about the scheme.

Several residents used a one-day hearing examining technical aspects of the application to spell out their grounds for opposing it - although other protest groups boycotted the hearing.

The inquiry was organised by Kent County Council to examine Brett Waste Management's proposal to build a solid waste to energy recycling facility (SWERF) plant capable of processing 165,000 tonnes of waste a year.

The plant would use controversial new technology which some say is unproven and potentially hazardous - claims rejected by the company.

Pensioner Patricia King, whose home is close to the site, said residents were frightened by what was in the offing. She stressed: "It is the technical side of things which is worrying people. We are all elderly and we are all frightened.

"Would these people build a waste management facility near their children's school?" she asked.

Dr Robert Povey, another resident opposed to the scheme, denounced the panel as a "political ruse" to enable county councillors to avoid being seen as "judge and jury on their own council".

He told the panel, headed by retired local authority planner Keith Nicholson, he believed KCC was determined to press ahead with an application where the technology involved was unproven.

KCC was "turning Canterbury into the dustbin of east Kent and its citizens as the guinea pigs of east Kent," he said. "This is the worst rather than the best environmental option. Re-thinking may involve some loss of face but is surely better than an irresponsible decision to place at risk people who live near the site."

Canterbury county councillor Graham Gibbens echoed the concerns over increased traffic and pollution, saying the image of Canterbury would suffer.

"This proposal and the additional number of lorries that it will generate in the city centre will make the hardship of people who live along the Military Road and Sturry Road even more intolerable than it is now," he said.

The panel's report is unlikely to be published for several weeks. The findings will be part of the evidence presented to county councillors who will determine the planning application.