Agenda item

Purpose: To provide information to assist the Scrutiny Commission in reviewing the development of the Council’s new Waste Strategy.

Councillor Stuart Gourley (Executive Portfolio Holder: Climate Action, Recycling and Biodiversity) and Daniel Warne (Waste Manager) presented the draft Waste Strategy (Agenda Item 6).

Members asked if paper got wet whether that affecting recycling and whether the crates should have lids to keep contents dry. Officers confirmed that wet paper was not a problem, other than increasing haulage weights, but Veolia had not raised this as a concern.

The issue of overflowing dog waste bins was raised. It was suggested that bins should have QR codes to make it easier for users to report when they needed emptying It was explained that dog bins were the responsibility of the Countryside Team.

It was suggested that educational material may help to increase food waste recycling. Officers confirmed that educational material had been included when the food waste bins had first been provided, but further information would be sent out in future. The most recent data showed that 59% of households took part in the food waste recycling scheme.

Member praised the repair cafés, which appeared to be working well.

It was suggested that some residents struggled to find compostable food caddy liners. It was confirmed that these were available from supermarkets, as well as online retailers such as Amazon. Also, residents could put loose food waste in the caddies. The Council had previously given away food waste bags via local libraries, and further giveaways were being considered.

It was highlighted that when Veolia collected food waste, bags were thrown in a large wheelie bin, leading to unpleasant smells. Concern was expressed that staff did not have suitable PPE. Officers confirmed that checks were made to ensure that Veolia met all relevant safety standards.

It was noted that just one of the options listed on page 72 of the agenda pack included free garden waste collections and that this was only anticipated to increase recycling rates from 52% to 53%. Members asked if the Administration was still committed to removing the charge. It was confirmed that the manifesto pledge was to phase out the charge, but there was no specific date for this.

It was suggested that some households would struggle to cope if black bin collection frequencies moved from fortnightly to once every three or four weeks, and that this would be unpopular with residents. Members asked how many other local authorities had already made this change. It was confirmed that several Councils had done this, including Bracknell Forest Council. It was stressed that this was just one of the options being considered. It was recognised that this would not work for everyone, and exceptions could be made where households needed more frequent collections.

It was noted that when this had been discussed at Environment Advisory Group, it had been misreported in the media, and it was stressed that this was just one of a number of options being considered.

Members asked if burnt-out vehicles could be removed more quickly than at present. Officers confirmed that they sought to remove vehicles as quickly as possible, but they had to comply with relevant legislation.

It was noted that the fly-tipping section of the strategy had not yet been completed. Officers confirmed that this would be in the next draft.

It was highlighted that the colours used in the strategy document made it difficult to read. It was confirmed that it would be checked by the Comms Team prior to publication.

Members asked if affluent areas such as West Berkshire produced more waste than other areas and if benchmarking had been undertaken. Officers felt that there was a link, but confirmed that benchmarking would be undertaken to confirm this.

Members thanked those who took part in community litter picking and suggested that its impacts should be monitored and reported. It was noted that the Council’s equipment was well-used, but some communities had their own equipment, so there was a need to work with partner organisations to measure impacts. Officers confirmed that they would look at how measurement and reporting could be improved.

Members asked if the 60% recycling target was sufficiently stretching and how this compared to other local authorities. Also, Members asked if achievement of the targets required a move to four-weekly bin collections. It was confirmed that a 60% recycling rate would be challenging to achieve and would put the Council in the top five local authorities nationally.

It was stressed that the top performing local authorities had introduced strong incentives for residents to recycle and throw away less. In other areas, public concerns before a move to less frequent black bin collections largely disappeared following the change. Push and pull factors would be needed in order to achieve recycling targets.

It was noted that Reading Borough Council had introduced smaller bins. Members asked if that had been considered for West Berkshire. Officers confirmed that it had, but reducing the frequency of collections had been shown to be more effective. Also, this was the cheaper and more environmentally friendly option, since the Council did not need to pay for new bins or dispose of existing ones.

Members stressed the importance of education programmes in schools. Experience suggested that younger children often brought family members to community litter-picks, and the primary school curriculum appeared to be effective in engaging children. It was noted that a recent waste vehicle livery competition had attracted over 500 entries and had proved an effective way to engage local schools. Also, the Waste Team had a dedicated officer who undertook educational visits to schools.

It was suggested that having local litter picking kits may make it easier for residents to take part. Officers undertook to consider whether this could be incorporated into the strategy.

Members highlighted that less frequent grass-cutting meant that litter was often hidden, and it was suggested that litter-picks be linked to cutting schedules.

The Great British Spring Clean was welcomed, but it was suggested that additional events be organised at other times throughout the year.

It was noted that the mini-recycling centres were well used, and it was suggested that if more could be provided, they would help with recycling of large cardboard boxes. It was confirmed that the cardboard recycling facility at Tilehurst would not be replaced following a recent fire. However, if large cardboard boxes were folded to a size no larger than a wheelie bin, then they would be collected from the kerbside. It was also confirmed that CCTV would be installed at recycling centres to try to address anti-social behaviour.

Members asked if it would be possible to have soft plastic collection in town centres. Officers confirmed that local authorities would be required to collect this from the kerbside by 2027.

There was some discussion about why garden and food waste were collected separately when they were subsequently mixed at the depot. It was explained that food waste was collected weekly, but garden waste was collected fortnightly, and the contract was specified and resourced on that basis. Research had shown that separate collections resulted in increased volumes being recycled. Also, separate food waste collections allowed households to see how much they were throwing away and so they were more likely to modify their behaviour. If food waste was processed via anaerobic digestion, it would generate energy from the resulting bio-methane. This was something that the Council was considering for the future.

Proposals to use lids or nets for kerbside recycling boxes were noted. Members felt that lids were preferable, since nets posed a risk to wildlife.

Concerns were highlighted about the Continental contract. It was suggested that if parish councils pulled out of the contract, this may have implications in terms of economies of scale. Officers confirmed that the contract was procured through the Countryside Team. Bin collection was a relatively small part of their operations, so the impacts of parish councils pulling out would be minimal.

Actions:

·       Suggest use of QR codes on dog bins to the Countryside Team.

·       Waste Team to develop additional educational materials to promote food waste recycling.

·       Ask Comms Team to check the accessibility of the Waste Strategy, including colour contrast.

·       Undertake benchmarking with other local authorities to check link between affluence and waste volume.

·       Consider how measurement and reporting of community litter-picking could be improved, and consider increased provision of community litter-picking kits.

·       Consider synchronising litter-picks with grass-cutting schedules.

RESOLVED to note the report.