Agenda item

Purpose: To consider the Council’s Waste Management Strategy prior to adoption.

Councillor Stuart Gourley (Executive Portfolio Holder: Environment and Highways), and Daniel Warne (Waste Manager) presented the Waste Management Strategy (Agenda Item 7).

The following points were discussed in the debate:

·       Concerns were expressed that the trolley system for recyclables would have reduced capacity compared to the current option.

·       It was suggested that people who were not recycling should be given support. Officers indicated that they already offered 1-2-1 support to help people manage their waste and work out what could be recycled.

·       Members asked how other local authorities that had already moved to three weekly collections had addressed concerns about odours from nappies, dog waste, etc. Officers confirmed that this had not been raised as a problem - issues were more around bin capacity. It was suggested that households should dispose of waste responsibly (e.g. using nappy sacks). It was also suggested that the Council should provide both leadership and support, working to mitigate issues as they arose.

·       Concerns were expressed about disparities in collection frequencies between flats with communal bins (which would still have weekly collections) and other households. Officers indicated that there was already a disparity. Local authorities that had already moved to three-weekly collections had not raised this as a concern. It was considered impractical to extend the collection frequency for flats with communal bins.

·       Members asked about the Christmas period when waste volumes were higher, and collection frequencies may extend beyond three weeks due to holidays. This was recognised as an issue, and allowance would be made for collecting extra bags of rubbish left out with bins during this period. Also, residents would be able to use the Household Waste Recycling Centres.

·       Officers were asked if fly-tipping and use of public bins might increase with the move to three weekly bin collections. It was stressed that fly-tipping was undertaken by criminals/rogue traders. Some local authorities had seen a reduction in fly-tipping following the move to three-weekly collections. West Berkshire had seen an 8% decrease in fly-tipping last year, which was contrary to the national trend. Increased use of public bins had not been raised as an issue by other local authorities, but this would be monitored. Education and communication would be important to support the changes.

·       Concerns were expressed that analysis of the consultation results was misleading - people who had answered ‘maybe’ when asked if they could cope with the move to three-weekly bin collections had been taken as confirming that they would be able to cope. It was accepted that people may have issues at certain times of year, but it was stressed that mitigations would be put in place to support those who answered ‘maybe’.

·       Members noted that savings from the move to three-weekly collections had been included in the budget, which pre-empted the adoption of the Waste Strategy. It was explained that this reflected the Administration’s direction of travel and if the strategy was not adopted, then it would become a pressure and in-year savings would need to be found. It was suggested that this had been included subject to approval from Executive, however, Members stated that the budget papers had not included that caveat. The Leader stressed that the budget had to anticipate planned changes. Members felt that residents might perceive this as a ‘done deal’.

·       Officers highlighted that the saving from the move to three-weekly bin collections would be around £150,000, or 0.5% of the annual waste budget. Such a pressure was not considered significant and could readily be accommodated by in-year efficiency savings. If the introduction of the changes was delayed, then the Council would have much larger cost exposures related to the emissions trading scheme. However, Members stressed that £150,000 was a significant level of revenue spend, particularly in the context of the Day Centre closures.

·       Members considered the move to a three-weekly bin collection to be a serious degradation to the service and it was suggested that this should have been set out in the Administration’s Manifesto. It was refuted that the change was a degradation of service, and it was stressed that it was offset by improvements to kerbside recycling.

·       It was noted that savings from the three-weekly collections still needed to be negotiated with Veolia. Members challenged why the Council was making the change if the savings would not be significant. It was suggested that better education could deliver the same improvement in recycling rates. It was acknowledged that change was difficult, but the proposed changes would improve efficiencies and recycling rates, while also delivering reductions in carbon emissions.

·       Members asked what would happen if it did not meet statutory waste/recycling targets. It was explained that emerging legislation focused on producer responsibility and the Council would receive funding from producers of packaging waste. The amount that the Council would receive would depend on how effective and efficient its services were. Initial payments reflected the fact that West Berkshire was doing well relative to other local authorities. The proposals would improve effectiveness and efficiencies further.

·       It was noted that there had been an excellent response to the consultation and residents wanted to work with the Council. It was hoped that the proposed changes coupled with additional support would lead to behaviour change, with reduced carbon emissions and waste to landfill.

·       Members stressed the need for careful monitoring following implementation of the strategy.

·       Clarification was sought about the options for replacing the recycling receptacles. It was explained that the trolley system had 2-3 boxes/bags stacked on a trolley – this system was used in Wales and had received a favourable response in the consultation. The wheelie bin option was similar to the current set-up and provided additional capacity. It was noted that there would be a capital cost for any change.

·       Members asked for a future report on implementation of the new recycling system and whether households were recycling their waste correctly.

Action: A future report to be brought to the Scrutiny Commission on implementation of the new recycling scheme.

RESOLVED to:

·       note the report;

·       request that if budget proposals are put to Council before strategies have been approved (in this case the waste strategy), the administration should make it clear that if the strategy is not agreed, then the proposed associated budget proposals will need to be revisited, and in the case of savings those will need to be found elsewhere;

·       request that future Council consultations represent responses accurately, rather than combining ‘maybe’ and ‘yes’;

·       request that the impact of the proposed changes be monitored; and

·       request a future update about whether households are recycling correctly.