Agenda item

To provide a response to the e-petition submitted on 5 September 2019 by Ms Sukey Russell-Hayward.

The wording of the e-petition is as follows:

“We, the undersigned, petition the Council to

1. Improve the environmental solutions for single-use plastics, including the collection and recycling of domestic plastic waste within West Berkshire.

2. Provide more effective communication on the environmental solutions for single-use plastics, including the collection and recycling of domestic plastic waste within West Berkshire.

3. Improve research into alternative and more ecological approaches to managing domestic plastic waste within West Berkshire.

As a resident of West Berkshire I am very concerned at the low level of plastic recycling which is collected in West Berkshire and challenge the council to improve this situation. I am also concerned about the council’s use of incineration to dispose of plastics, when far less polluting, effective and efficient processes are available and used by other councils.

Some local residents have tried to compensate by offering collection points at their homes and then driving cars full of plastics to collection bins at Sainsbury’s in Reading. This is not sustainable, and these people and businesses have become overrun with the volume of plastics being deposited, posing significant issues in terms of storage, handling and health risks.

Many councils, e.g. Stroud, Gloucester and Oxford, have excellent kerbside collections and transparency in terms of their contracts and recycling policy, including what happens to the plastics post collection. I would like to see West Berkshire Council taking a lead in, and communicating clearly, environmental solutions which directly impact our community and the wider environment.”

The Chairman informed those present how the petition for debate would be managed. He explained that in accordance with paragraph 1.4 (f) of the Council’s Procedure Rules for Dealing with Representations, the petition organiser had five minutes to introduce the petition and the petition would then be discussed by Councillors for a maximum of 15 minutes. This time limit was specified in the Constitution and could not be extended. Based on proportionality the Conservative Group would be allocated eight of these minutes, the Liberal Democrat Group would have six minutes and the Green Party one minute.

The Council had three options for dealing with petitions for debate:

1.         To take the action the petition suggests

2.         Not to take the action for the reason put forward in the debate

3.         To commission a further investigation into the matter

Members could propose one of the options, which if seconded, would be put to a vote. 

The petition stated:

“We, the undersigned, petition the Council to

1. Improve the environmental solutions for single-use plastics, including the collection and recycling of domestic plastic waste within West Berkshire.

2. Provide more effective communication on the environmental solutions for single-use plastics, including the collection and recycling of domestic plastic waste within West Berkshire.

3. Improve research into alternative and more ecological approaches to managing domestic plastic waste within West Berkshire.”

As the petition organiser Ms Sukey Russell was uncertain if she would be able to get to the meeting on time she asked Councillor Steve Masters to introduce the petition on her behalf.

Councillor Masters stated that residents were making lots of sacrifices in order to take items that were not collected in West Berkshire to neighbouring authorities that did recycle them. Residents were concerned about the low levels of single use plastics collected by the Council. They were also concerned that the plastic was being incinerated and that residents were making a significant number of car journeys to take the plastics elsewhere. They were urging the Council to emulate recycling activity undertaken by other authorities. They urged the Council not only to look into the issue of food waste but also to increase the range of plastics collected at kerbside. They urged the Council to improve research into alternative and more ecological approaches to managing domestic plastic waste within the District and to improve consultation and engagement with the public on this matter.

Councillor Steve Ardagh-Walter proposed that Members did not take the action proposed in the petition for the reasons that would be put forward in the debate and as set out in the accompanying report. Councillor Ross Mackinnon seconded the motion. Councillor Carolyne Culver stated that she would like to propose that the Council commission a further investigation into the matter. The Monitoring Officer explained that only one motion could be moved at any one time and no further motion could be moved until that proposal had been dispensed with.

Councillor Steve Ardagh-Walter stated that while he welcomed the spirit of the petition it was important that the Council disposed of any recycled matter responsibly. He suggested that the Council paused until there was further clarity from Central Government on emerging waste collection requirements, funding options and the development of established offtake markets for these additional materials preferably in the UK. Councillor Ardagh-Walter commented that plastic had become the symbol of harm being done to the planet. The Council would continue to ensure that it dealt with recycled materials in a responsible manner and that it did not add unnecessarily to carbon emissions by transporting the materials to Continental Europe to be processed. He stressed the need for manufacturers to bear the cost of dealing with the materials they were producing.

The Council was however committed to improving its recycling performance. Officers were of the view that a more cost effective solution would be to explore introducing separate food waste collections at the kerbside which would deliver significantly better environmental and value for money solutions.

Councillor Carolyne Culver stated that she agreed that it was not appropriate for tax payers to subsidise the costs being generated by the manufacturers. However she felt that the Council should opt to commission a further investigation into the matter. They could for example look into the way waste was handled by other authorities including Oxford and Exeter. She agreed that the Council should introduce the food caddy system as soon as possible. She also believed that the Council should revoke the green bin charge to reduce reliance on black bins.

Councillor Adrian Abbs contested the comment in the report that stated that the Council was one of the better performing local authorities in England. He stated that the Council was ranked 87^th of the 345 local authorities in the country which meant they were not even in the top quartile. Recycling rates were 15.5% lower than the best performing authorities. He believed that some of the data that the recommendations were based on was inaccurate. The Council had recently declared a climate emergency and needed to act on it.

He noted that the re3 Recycling Centre in Reading accepted mixed plastics and the Council needed to look further afield to find a solution. This would not necessarily mean having to spend up to £1m  on upgrading the sorting technology at the Padworth Recycling Facility. Over 2000 residents had taken the time to sign the petition and the Council needed to listen to their concerns. He therefore urged Members to support option 3 and spend some additional funding on additional investigations rather than opting not to take the action set out in the petition.

Councillor Owen Jeffery urged the Council not to be complacent about its recycling rate of 49% and urged it to do more. He stated that Members needed to listen to the concerns being raised by its residents.

Councillor Martha Vickers agreed that recycling was not the best option and that more should be done to reduce waste from the outset. She noted that the report outlined that around 25% of the waste in black bins was food waste and that not everyone had a green bin to put their food waste into. She felt that more should be done to promote schemes that supported the reduction of food waste being generated.

Councillor Graham Bridgman commented on the statements made by Councillor Abbs about recycling rates in Reading by reminding him that that West Berkshire Council’s recycling rates were significantly better than theirs.

Councillor Hilary Cole reminded Members that residents could use their green bins for food waste irrespective of whether they paid for them or not.

Councillor Ross Mackinnon acknowledged the concerns raised by residents through the petition. He questioned the statement about inaccuracies in the data. He acknowledged that more could be done but that the Council needed to act responsibly. He noted that many authorities exported their plastic pots, tubs and trays (PTTs), often through third party organisations which meant that they did not retain control of the disposal mechanisms.

The introduction of the technology to recycle these materials would come at a significant cost to tax payers and could potentially have a very short shelf life if legislative changes were introduced. He therefore supported the proposal not to make any changes to the existing collection service for plastic waste until there was further clarity from Central Government on emerging waste collection requirements, funding options and the development of established offtake markets for these additional materials. Hopefully any changes would result in producers moving away from using these materials or being forced to pick up the liability for their disposal where they did not choose to do so.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

Prior to the vote being taken Councillor Lee Dillon requested that, in accordance with paragraph 4.17.3, the vote be recorded. The requisite number of Members supported the motion by standing in their place.

For the Motion (Not to take the action for the reason put forward in the debate)

Steve Ardagh-Walter,  Jeff Beck, Dennis Benneyworth, Dominic Boeck, Graham Bridgman, Hilary Cole, James Cole, Lynne Doherty, Clive Hooker, Gareth Hurley, Rick Jones, Alan Law, Tony Linden, Tom Marino, Ross Mackinnon, Graham Pask, Claire Rowles, Garth Simpson, Richard Somner, Jo Stewart, Andy Williamson, Howard Woollaston (22)

Against the Motion (Not to take the action for the reason put forward in the debate)

Adrian Abbs, Phil Barnett, Jeff Brooks, Jeremy Cottam, Carolyne Culver, Lee Dillon, Billy Drummond, Owen Jeffery, NassarKessell, Alan Macro, David Marsh, Steve Masters, Geoff Mayes, Erik Pattenden, Martha Vickers, Tony Vickers, Keith Woodhams (17)