Agenda item

To consider a report from the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development presenting evidence in line with session one of the Board’s Inquiry into Recycling.

 

The Head of Scrutiny and Member Development submitted a report in line with sessions one of the Board’s Inquiry into Recycling.

 

Appended to the report was a copy of the following documents for Members’ information/comments:

 

·  Inquiry Into Recycling – Terms of Reference (Appendix 1 refers)

·  Summary report of the Working Group meeting held on 19^th October 2009, together with various maps indicating no green areas by wedge (Appendix 2 refers)

·  Report of the Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods – Scrutiny Inquiry into Recycling – Existing Collection and Disposal Methods (Appendix 3 refers)

 

The following representatives were in attendance and responded to Members’ queries and comments:

 

·  Neil Evans, Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods

·  Councillor J Monaghan, Executive Member for Environmental Services

 

In brief, the main issues raised were:

 

·  Confirmation of when the report on the Recycling Infrastructure would be submitted to Executive Board for consideration.

(In response, the Director informed the meeting that the report had been delayed until a resolution had been reached regarding the streetscene dispute).

 

  It was acknowledged that this report acknowledges the Board’s inquiry   and reflects any significant issues that are being raised.

 

·  Members considered the existing service gaps in terms of the SORT recycling provision.  In terms of addressing this gap, particular emphasis was made on finding solutions to meet the needs of those particular local areas.

 

·  Members noted that 55% of the city currently receive collections of garden waste and that around a further 22% of remaining household waste were deemed suitable to be included in collection routes.  Members sort clarification of what impact that 22% would have on improving the overall collection figures.

(In response, the Director informed the meeting that it would add 2% to the overall figures). 

 

·  Members recognised the need for further clarification on which plastics are recyclable and also suggested lobbying manufacturers to restrict the unnecessary use of packaging and the many different types of plastics used.  Members also highlighted the confusion caused by the coding system used by manufacturers to show which plastics are recyclable as not all authorities collect the full range of recyclable plastics.

(In response, the Director also recognised the benefits of having a national campaign for plastics with a clear set of guidance). 

 

·  Particular reference was also made to recycling glass.  The Executive Board Member for Environmental Services acknowledged that whilst there were extensive bottle banks placed across the city there were certain areas which do not have access to a bottle bank and that solutions need to made to meet their needs.

 

·  Members felt that some of the bottle banks were a noise nuisance and the that there needs to be closer working with Planning in order to decide where the most appropriate place would be to site the bottle banks in order to avoid noise nuisance in residential areas. 

 

·  Members felt there was a need for more collections at bottle banks in order to avoid frequent overflows.  It was also suggested that more partnership work needs to be carried out with local supermarkets rather than duplicate efforts for bottle bank collections.

 

·  With regard to the new waste transfer station off Kirkstall Road, clarification was sought on the next round of public consultation as Members understood that further research would be done in relation to the potential impact on traffic at this particular site.  It was highlighted that local residents felt that there were other sites across the city that would be more appropriate, such as along the Ring Road and not in the centre of city.

  (In response, the Director informed the meeting that once final bidders had been identified there would be further consultation.  However, there   would be no further consultation regarding the location of the site itself as   this had already been agreed and put into the specification.  Bidders had   been given the opportunity to put forward alternative locations, but none   had been identified to date.

 

  With regard to traffic impact at the Kirkstall Road site, the Director   informed the meeting that the lorries using the site were not expected to   cause any major problem as the lorries would not enter the site during the   peak times). 

 

  It was agreed that this issue would be picked up with Ward Members   separately.

 

·  A Member raised concerns that in some areas where there is a green bag collection service, the green bag was not always replaced for future use.

 

·  Clarification of the overall Education Strategy for recycling.

(In response, the Director confirmed that resources had been put into educating people about recycling which has  had a positive impact on the majority of people.  The focus now was targeting the hard to reach areas such as the transient population i.e. students).

 

·  Clarification was sought on what impact the strike action has had on the Council’s current recycling targets and whether there would be an evaluation on this in the future.  It was also felts that the public may need to be encouraged again to start recycling.

(In response, the Director informed the meeting that in September 2009 the department achieved around 30% recycling with the vast majority being through the household waste sites.  However the overall tonnage of recycling collected was down as was the amount of waste collected for disposal).

 

Members requested the most up-to-date target figures and details of the target figures for last year to use as a comparator.

 

It was agreed that this information would be forwarded to next Working Group meeting in December 2009.

 

·  How much of the recycling waste had been contaminated?

(In response, the Director informed the meeting that he was unaware of how much people were either stopping or contaminating recyclables. It was noted that over the next few days the Council would be taking a sample of green bins, from five selected routes across the city to ascertain whether any ordinary rubbish had ended up in the recycling bin due to the black bins overflowing).

 

Members requested clarification of those five routes. 

 

·  Clarification was sought on when waste management were proposing to return to monthly collections.

(In response, the Director informed the meeting that monthly recycling collections would start from Monday, 16^th November 2009).

 

Members requested that the collection dates be communicated effectively to residents either via leaflet or by using the local media.

 

·  Members also advised that the database on the Council’s recycling web page that is used by Members and the public to clarify refuse and recycling collection dates be kept up-to-date as Members had looked up a number of addresses which were not recognised by the database. 

 

·  Members made reference to the use of fortnightly collections and food waste collections and sort clarification of when the Food Waste Trial Pilot Scheme in Rothwell would commence.

 

It was acknowledged that whilst the pilot was still planned for the future, it  would be difficult to proceed with the Scheme under the current circumstances.

 

·  Members referred to the Way Forward Review of Waste Collection Services and the report submitted to Executive Board on 22^nd July 2009 where it was agreed that the process of market testing waste collection be commenced.

 

The Executive Board Member for Environmental Services informed the meeting that a reference to this had been made at the Council meeting held on 16^th September 2009 requesting reconsideration of the agreement to proceed with market testing.

(In response, the Director informed the meeting that the Council wants to achieve the best quality service and if that can be achieved inhouse then the Council would not commence with market testing, but if not, then  market testing would be carried out).

 

·  Members felt there was a need to undertake a cost analysis in terms of providing a tailored service for local areas.  Such analysis would help to inform the Board with its final recommendations.

 

·  Members suggested that as part of the inquiry it would also be worth researching what methods other countries had adopted for recycling as best practice.

 

The Chair thanked Councillor Monaghan and Neil Evans for their attendance.

 

RESOLVED -  That the summary report of the Working Group meeting held on 19^th October 2009 and the report by the Director of Environment and

Neighbourhoods regarding existing collection and disposal methods and the comments now made, be received and noted.

 

Note: Councillor D Hollingsworth joined the meeting at 10.15 a.m. and   Councillor M Rafique joined the meeting at 10.30 a.m. during   consideration of the above item.