Agenda item

To respond to the Garden Waste petition submitted to the Council at the Executive meeting on 18 October 2018.

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 18) which set out a response to the Garden Waste petition containing 6,854 signatures submitted to the Council on 18 October 2018.

Prior to the discussion starting on this item the Chairman explained that in accordance with paragraph 1.4 (f) of Appendix C (Procedure Rules for Dealing with Representations) to Part 13 (Codes and Protocols) of the Constitution the procedure for dealing with this item would be that the petition organiser would have five minutes to introduce the petition. Councillor Graham Jones would propose the Council’s response and the response would be seconded by Councillor Hilary Cole. They would each have five minutes to speak. The Opposition Spokesman would have 2.5 minutes to speak and other Members would be able to use the remaining 2.5 minutes to make comment.

Councillor Macro in introducing the petition stated that this was an amalgam of two petitions; one arranged by Mr George Davis and one arranged by him. In talking to residents he had been surprised at their strength of feeling on this issue. The petition stated that:

“Do not charge residents to recycle! Scrap the £50 charge! This charge comes as an additional separate payment on top of council tax, and is optional. Recycling is an essential service and should not be charged additionally - it is not a hobby for the wealthy. Less economically fortunate residents should not be trapped out of recycling their garden waste. Further to this, there are concerns disabled and elderly residents will not be able to take recycling to a waste facility as an alternative. We are at an environmental tipping point, everyone needs to be able to play their part in protecting the environment. We need to maintain and improve recycling rates not risk lowering them! Nearly 85% of respondents to the consultation oppose the £50 charge. We do not support this charge, or the damage it could do to our environment. I urge you, West Berkshire Council, to scrap the £50 charge immediately!”

He noted that the report stated that the consultation had ‘helped to inform the recommendation which was considered at the meeting of Council which took place on 1 March 2018’. He disagreed with that comment and felt that the views of consultees had not been taken into account. The petition raised the potential impact on poorer households. The petition organisers were also concerned that the charge might have a negative impact on recycling rates. They were also concerned that disabled and elderly residents might have difficulties accessing recycling centres. Councillor Macro also commented that the Council had not widely highlighted that the payments could be made in instalments. He stated that the Council had chosen to ignore the comments made by 85% (643) of the respondents to the consultation and he urged Members not to ignore the 6,854 people that had signed the petition.

Councillor Graham Jones stated that the Council had been forced to make a number of decisions over the past five years that the Administration did not want to make. Costs continued to increase and council tax was used in the main to fund core services. He accepted that that there was a disconnect and better dialogue was needed as to how care was funded in the future. It was important to keep Council Tax as low as possible while continuing to care for the most vulnerable residents in the District.

Councillor Jones noted that most neighbouring authorities already charged for the collection of green waste and it was predicted that all authorities would be doing so by 2022. It was simple, if there was no funding for services they could not be delivered. While charging for the service could be revisited in the future in the current climate it would not be possible to remove the charge.

Councillor Lee Dillon stated that when this item was discussed at the March 2018 meeting he had proposed that the Council use £450k of the remainder of the Transitional Fund to reduce the proposed green waste collection service charge from £50 per household to £25 per household for 2018/19 to assist residents with the transition. In his opinion the Transition Funding was set up precisely to deal with these issues where it could be used to mitigate harm. The Council needed to recognise the universal right to recycle and needed to make it as easy as possible for residents to do so.

Councillor Graham Bridgman stated that Members would need to consider what would be missing if the requests within the petition was adhered to. Someone would need to tell the Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care which services totalling circa £1m they would like to see cut. The Council was seeking to generate income. No-one wanted to charge residents for valuable services but this was a service that the Council did not have a statutory duty to provide.

Councillor Lee Dillon raised a point of order and stated that income generated was around £900k and not a million pounds as Councillor Bridgman was suggesting. In addition the £900k also included some one off costs. Councillor Bridgman accepted this point and stated that the Council would lose £900k of income which would have to be found from elsewhere in the budget.

Councillor Hilary Cole said that she understood the reasons behind the petition. She did however wish the Council to note that of the 6854 signatories only 3776 of them resided within West Berkshire. The remaining 3078 signatories were from other parts of the country and also from all around the world.

Councillor Macro raised a point of order and stated that some residents would state that they lived in Reading albeit that they were still residents of West Berkshire.

Councillor Cole explained that Officers had taken that issue into consideration and she was confident that the figures they had produced were correct. Councillor Cole agreed with Councillor Jones that all councils were likely to introduce the charges by 2022. Many already did. The lowest charge was currently £44.20 and the highest was £75.00. Eleven of the thirteen Liberal Democrat run Councils had already introduced the charge and the highest charging of those authorities charged £70.00.

To date 26,000 households had signed up for the scheme which was a higher figure than had been modelled on. She reiterated that this was an opt in charge and was not a Green Bin Tax. The Council would continue to encourage residents to home compost as this was still the greenest option. The Council was being forced to make tough choices and this charge was seen as being preferable to cutting services to the District’s most vulnerable residents.

Councillor Graham Jones commented that he too had spoken to residents and had received a different response to those received by the petitioners. The people he had spoken to had an understanding of the local authority’s financial position. He reminded the Opposition Group that they had endorsed the principle at the March 2018 Council meeting.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Graham Jones and seconded by Councillor Hilary Cole:

That the Council:

“rejects the proposal and continue charging for the garden waste collection service in light of the significant financial and resource implications that would result from the proposal in the petition ”.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.