Memorandum by Tandridge District Council
(RC 4)
1. PURPOSE OF
MEMORANDUM
Tandridge District Council wishes to submit
to the select committee its view regarding the collection of recycling
and residual waste.
2. SELECT COMMITTEE
TOPICS
2.1 In order to assist in responding to
the committee request for evidence please find set out below comments
appropriate to the select committees topic headings as published
in the call for evidence announcement.
2.2 Collection methods, waste minimisation,
effective recycling, the reduction of waste to landfill and joint
working
2.2.1 Tandridge District Council as a waste
collection authority covers a largely rural area to the south
of London. The district combines significant urban areas abutting
the London boundary with settlements such as Caterham, Warlingham
and Whyteleafe to the North whilst at 93% green belt the south
of the district is very rural in character. This indicates that
Tandridge is well placed to consider the vagaries of recycling
and residual waste collection to the residents of these two distinct
areas.
2.2.2 Within the last 18 months this council
has entered into contract with BIFFA waste services for the collection
of recycling and residual waste. The contract was arrived at through
the negotiated tender process with the last four interested parties
representing major nationally recognised waste services providers.
The letting of this contract followed an extensive pre-contract
consultation with our residents on the type of service they wanted
and ultimately are prepared to pay for.
2.2.3 The outcome of our consultation clearly
indicated a preference for the continuation of the current weekly
back-door collection method for residual waste even though this
would only be achieved at greater cost than certain other methods
of collection. Residents were also content with the curtilage/kerbside
recycling service although they would prefer to see that weekly
rather than continuing as a fortnightly service.
2.2.4 It was further demonstrated that residents
did not want a "wheelie" bin service and wished their
service to remain weekly. Those requirements have been complied
with and as part of the new contract we also now collect recycling
materials and residual waste weekly on the same day, including
glass. This has been well received and is helping to push our
recycling participation rates well above the average toward the
60% level and beyond. On the basis of "keep it simple"
residents only need to remember that it is waste collection day
to put their recyclables out for collection.
2.2.5 Our consultation surveys also demonstrated
the residents desire to see a recycling service for the collection
of plastics. Therefore as part of the new contract arrangements
have been made to roll out such a service across the district.
Residents may now add plastics to the recycle box. Whilst for
the purposes of Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPI) this
of itself does not increase the weight of material collected it
encourages participation and brings other recyclables to the material
stream.
2.2.6 Through its efforts this authority
is collecting 24% SORTED DRY RECYLABLES through its adopted method
of service. Our view is that this product sorted at kerbside is
genuinely providing good quality uncontaminated materials that
may be remanufactured into new goods. It is a cause of some chagrin
that the BVPI concentrates on weight collected rather than quality
of material.
2.2.7 GREEN WASTE however, is not collected.
There is no suitable facility within a reasonable distance with
which to take such material for disposal should it be collected.
The County Council is the disposal authority in two tier arrangements.
There is a reluctance to spend time and resources on sending refuse
freighters many hundreds of miles just to unload green waste.
This council does not consider such an approach as environmentally
sound. Instead residents are encouraged to compost their green
waste. Subsidised composters are made available for this purpose.
The take up and enthusiasm has been such that approaching 6,000
composters have already been distributed across a domestic housing
stock of 32,000.
2.2.8 Tandridge, as a district council within
Surrey is a signatory of the Surrey Joint Municipal Waste Management
Strategy (SJMWMS). The SJMWMS comprises all the 11 Boroughs and
Districts and the County Council. The agreed joint strategy has
only been achieved as a result of considerable hard work and compromise
by all parties. What has been achieved is a set of agreed aims
in an action plan that each of the parties will endeavour to complete.
The theme being that working in partnership does not necessarily
mean providing exactly the same services.
2.2.9 The county council through the SJMWMS
are to build in-vessel composters to treat kitchen waste. Kitchen
waste is thought to comprise around 16% of residual waste by weight.
It is imperative that the disposal arrangements and the collection
arrangements dovetail correctly. Until the disposal authority
is clearly able to commit to the provision of this equipment and
that the disposal points are within reasonable travelling distance
it is not possible for the collection authorities to provide a
service to remove this organic matter from the waste stream and
prevent it going to landfill. The collection authorities will
require specialised containers, special vehicles and need to organise
and implement publicity campaigns some months ahead of the opening
of any such disposal point to ensure public awareness and cooperation
with the scheme.
2.3 Information programmes, how the Department
of Communities And Local Government can contribute to reducing
the amount of waste through the provision of information
2.3.1 Local authorities have looked to the
government to run national campaigns to encourage recycling. The
current campaign is to be welcomed however as with many "public
service" announcements it needs to be kept fresh and relevant
to retain its impact. Many local authorities run local campaigns
to encourage local participation in recycling and waste minimisation
and support to fund those campaigns, to tie in with the national
projects would be a benefit.
2.4 Technology: the contribution of collection
technologies to waste minimisation, reduction and setting
2.4.1 The use of certain technologies is
to be welcomed. The use of real time vehicle positioning and hand
held monitoring devices have been very useful in providing consistent
and better services so encouraging participation.
2.4.2 However, the use of technology with
regard to the collection of waste is a matter of concern to this
authority particularly the use of "chipped bins" and
the potential introduction of "pay as you throw schemes".
There are concerns regarding the control of such schemes, their
effectiveness, complexity, and wider impact on the environment
through encouraging fly-tipping of household waste, the cost of
introducing the necessary equipment and the potential public disquiet
at the imposition of any such scheme.
2.5 How decisions taken by local authorities
about collection/disposal methods aid or constrain future collection
methods and minimisation
2.5.1 As a collection authority this council
relies on the disposal authority to make appropriate facilities
available. As mentioned in 2.2.7 and 2.2.9 above it has not so
far been possible for our disposal authority to provide green
or kitchen waste facilities. However, if such facilities were
in place the costs to us of providing a collection service may
be prohibitive without support.
2.5.2 As well as providing an excellent
kerbside sorted recycling service we also provide 120 "bring
sites" for several materials across the district. The intention
here is to make it as easy as possible for residents to recycle.
All this has been provided at a cost to this council. Some of
our costs are off-set by the recycling credits achieved or from
the sale of the recycled materials.
2.5.3 Locally, there are only two amenity
sites that are provided by the disposal authority to service the
district. We could benefit from a greater coverage as these sites
generally complement the work of the collection authority but
this would require further investment that is not available at
present.
2.5.4 Notwithstanding this it is noted that
the disposal authority has clearly now sought to vastly improve
the recycling facilities at these sites. This is of concern as
it is demonstrably the case that we now find ourselves as the
"collection authority" in involuntary competition with
the "disposal authority" for recyclables. The positioning
of the existing amenity sites is such that they fall with the
routes of our recycling vehicles and furthermore we also have
recycling bring sites within a few hundred yards of these amenity
facilities. As mentioned in 2.5.2 above, there is a cost to this
council to provide recycling services. The materials that are
directed into the amenity sites away from our services are considered
a lost income to this council and detrimentally affect our BVPI.
3. REPRESENTATION
In closing I would like to bring it to your
attention that policy makers here at Tandridge would welcome the
opportunity to attend the select committee to present their view
on this most important issue.
It is to be hoped that the foregoing information
is of use and will assist the committee in its deliberations.
| 
