Localism Bill

Memorandum submitted by Keep Britain Tidy (L 56)

Keep Britain Tidy is passionate about cleaner, greener places.

Our vision is for a cleaner, greener England respected and enjoyed by all.

We campaign AGAINST litter and neglect FOR better cared for and more attractive places.

We HELP by providing knowledge, advice and support.

We LEAD by inspiring policy and practical action.

Non Domestic rates

1) Keep Britain Tidy welcomes the proposals to bring about ballots on the imposition of a business rate supplements. These proposals could be used to provide resources to deliver clean and safe environments in areas such as town centres, business parks and shopping centres. However, it is slightly unclear how these proposals align with existing Business Improvement Districts and we would wish to see this clarified and the excellent work of many existing local partnerships recognised and extended.

Local Referendums

2) The proposal to introduce local referendums potentially provides communities with a powerful tool to hold local government to account. However, the 5% threshold in order to trigger a referendum is extremely challenging. We are concerned with environmental well being issues such as fly tipping or graffiti in their immediate area they will find it difficult to get wider support from other areas or wards within the local authority area .

Community right to challenge

3) The proposal to allow voluntary and community groups to express an interest in providing or assisting in providing a relevant service could provide innovation in public services. Keep Britain Tidy would expect to see safeguards to ensure services delivering local environmental quality – for example cleansing, street lighting, streetscene or greenspace management, would continue to be delivered without a reduction in the quality of delivery or of management standards.

Community right to of bid

4) Keep Britain Tidy welcomes the development of a list of community assets and the proposals to ensure land and buildings are not sold without being offered to community groups. Keep Britain Tidy would like to see the proposed regulations regarding the definition of community to reflect community groups such as friends of parks.

Use of Community Infrastructure Levy

5) Increasing the flexibility of the Community Infrastructure Levy will help alleviate the problems of the lack of ongoing capital support for new infrastructure. The long term maintenance of infrastructure is problematic as poorly maintained infrastructure can impact on local environmental quality standards in local areas. Quality standards, such as the Green Flag Awards for greenspaces, already supported by the Government provide an excellent mechanism for service improvement and community engagement

6) Good design is vital to ensure the creation of excellent public spaces but also to ensure those spaces remain of a high standard during their lifetime through due consideration of their long term durability and maintainability with regards to cleansing. The importance of design has not, to date, significantly taken into account the need to address the longer-term maintainability of public realm – for example cleansing, location and design of litter bins and recycling facilities. The focus has been predominantly on ‘aesthetics’ and ‘function’.

Neighbourhood Planning

7) Keep Britain Tidy welcomes the proposal to enable local neighbourhoods to have a say on the location and design of new builds in their local area. However, such proposals will require considerable resources from both local authorities and civil society groups and we are concerned whether such support will be forthcoming in s time of austerity. We would like to see this initiative allow neighbourhoods to consider the long term maintenance of new developments to ensure local neighbourhoods not only receive the right infrastructure but that it is of a high quality infrastructure that will improve local environmental quality through time rather than detract from it.

8) The Policy Exchange (2009) notes that commissioners and designers of public spaces should engage with the people who will use manage and maintain them as early as possible in the design process to ensure that they are easy to maintain thereby preventing the deterioration of new public spaces which, whilst looking good in photographs and winning design awards, must also be easy to clean, maintain and live with.

9) Well-designed, well-managed and maintained public spaces are likely to be used in a positive way and encourage pro-social behaviour and generate positive social, economic and environmental value for local areas (RSA, 2000). Conversely, poor quality public spaces which are poorly designed, managed and maintained contribute to antisocial behaviour such as graffiti, littering and fly-tipping and result in fewer people using those spaces (CABE Space, 2005).

CABE Space (2005b) Decent Parks? Decent behaviour? - The Link Between the Quality of Parks and User Behaviour, CABE Space, London

Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA) (2000) Pro-social behaviour, http://www.thersa.org/projects/pro-social-behaviour.

Policy Exchange (2009) Litterbugs – How to Deal with the Problem of Littering, Policy Exchange, London

Enforcement

10) Keep Britain Tidy supports the proposals to extend, throughout England, the provisions in the London Local Authorities Act (1995) and subsequent London Local Authorities Act (2004) relating to the removal of fly tipping and graffiti by the owners of premises and street furniture regularly impacted by such local environmental quality problems. Its success in London, however, was reliant on a supporting code of practice developed by London Councils, Defra and representatives from the public and private sector. We believe such support would be needed to roll these provisions out on a national basis and as such resource will be required for Government to ensure its successful application by the public and private sector through delivery bodies such as Keep Britain Tidy.

11) Keep Britain Tidy believes that this Bill provides an opportunity to amend part 4, section 87 Of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (a call from ourselves, local authorities and Local Government Regulation) to enable local authorities to deal specifically with littering from vehicles. This would help to reduce the high levels of litter at road junctions, roundabouts and exits from service areas which are difficult to clean up. Litter thrown from vehicles is a problem which affects the cleanliness of both highways and roadside verges, creating a cleansing issue for many local authorities. Furthermore, many drivers and passengers feel they are anonymous when throwing litter from vehicles. The introduction of a specific offence – where the owner of a vehicle is held responsible for such littering (unless they can prove otherwise) – would provide a discouragement for drivers and their passengers who might otherwise be inclined to throw litter. In addition, this would provide a further means for local authorities to tackle the growing problem of roadside litter.

12) In London, the power to tackle littering from vehicles was recently introduced by the London Local Authorities Act 2007. Section 24 of this Act gives a London Borough Council the power to serve a Penalty Charge Notice on the registered keeper of a vehicle if any passenger throws litter from that vehicle:

13) "This section is a penalty charge provision for the purposes of section 61 (penalty charges) of this Act. A penalty charge is payable to a borough council for the purposes of the said section 61 with respect to a motor vehicle or a pedicab by the owner of the vehicle or pedicab if a person inside or on board the vehicle or pedicab acts in contravention of section 87 of the 1990 Act (offence of leaving litter)."

14) In this case, the use of the Penalty Charge Notice rather than the Fixed Penalty Notice means this is a Civil offence, rather than a Criminal offence. Furthermore, due to defective drafting the 2007 Act is not yet active until amending legislation has been given Royal Assent through Part 7 (33) of the London Local Authorities Bill.

15) We propose that the enforcement section of the Localism Bill should be amended to include a reference to the issue of vehicle related litter. This would follow on from the commitment made by Lord Henley (Minister responsible for local environmental quality) at the National Litter Convention in December 2010 to finding a solution to this problem.

16) We suggest the following amendment is included in the Localism Bill:

In Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (litter etc) in section 87 (offence of leaving litter) after subsection (7) insert–

"(8) Where litter is deposited from a motor vehicle, the person in charge of the vehicle shall, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, be treated as having deposited the litter whether or not he gave any instructions for this to be done.

(9) Subsection (8) above shall not apply where the vehicle is-

(a) a public service vehicle, within the meaning of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981;

(b) a hackney carriage licensed under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 or the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869;

(c) a private hire vehicle licensed under the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998; or

(d) a vehicle licensed under section 48 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (c. 57)(licensing of private hire vehicles).

(10) The registered keeper of a vehicle other than a vehicle operated under a contract for hire shall, for the purposes of subsection (8) above, be deemed to be the person in charge of the vehicle unless within twenty one days of receipt of the summons for an offence prosecuted by virtue of subsection (8) above the registered keeper provides in writing to the prosecutor notification of such identifying details as are available to him of any other person he claims to have been the person in charge of the vehicle at the relevant time.

(11) Where litter is deposited from a vehicle operated under a contract for hire the hirer of the vehicle shall, for the purposes of subsection (8) above, be deemed to be the person in charge of the vehicle unless within twenty one days of receipt of the summons for an offence prosecuted by virtue of subsection (8) above the hirer of the vehicle provides in writing to the prosecutor notification of such identifying details as are available to him of any other person he claims to have been the person in charge of the vehicle at the relevant time.

(12) For the purposes of subsection (8) above a constable or an authorised officer of a principal litter authority may by notice in writing served on him, require any person to furnish such information specified in the notice as may reasonably be required to ascertain the person in charge of the vehicle at the relevant time, in such form and within such period, being not less than fourteen days following service of the notice, as is so specified.

(13) It is an offence for a person, to make a statement which he knows to be false or misleading in a material particular, or recklessly to make a statement which is false or misleading in a material particular, where the statement is made pursuant to subsection (10) subsection (11) or subsection (12) above.

(14) It is an offence for a person without reasonable excuse to fail to comply with any requirement imposed under subsection (12) above."

17) The amendment has legislative precedent and is in line with the legislation on other road traffic investigation and fly-tipping offences, and the approach taken to littering from vehicles in the London Local Authorities Act 2007. We believe that the above wording should not therefore require any additional special defences. The wording of subsection (10) would allow for situations where a vehicle is stolen or taken without knowledge of the registered keeper, and the wording in subsections (9), (10) and (11) where a hire vehicle is involved.

18) We further propose that the Localism Bill should be amended to include a provision to extend Street Litter Control Notices to office buildings. The Localism Bill provides an excellent opportunity to include a minor amendment to the current legislation in order to solve the problem at the local level. The amendment fits with the overall aims of the legislation, and with the specific new powers proposed for local authorities to tackle persistent fly-posting and graffiti.

19) Sections 93 and 94 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 give local authorities the power to issue Street Litter Control Notices on premises that have a frontage on a street, and outside which litter or refuse is causing defacement of the land. However, the legislation was originally envisaged to tackle fast food litter and till receipts, as such, notices cannot normally be served on office buildings unless they sell food and drink whether or not for consumption on the premises (e.g. from a canteen or snack kiosk). The latest Local Environmental Quality Survey of England (LEQSE) reveals that smoking related litter is present on 76% on sites surveys and is the most frequently found litter type.

20) Extending the Street Litter Control Notice provisions to include office buildings would provide a vital tool for Litter Authorities (usually Local Authorities) to deal with localised littering problems, and would close a loophole in the legislation. It would also encourage members of the public to take increased responsibility for their litter. This proposal would allow local authorities to require the occupiers/owners of offices and non-food retail outlets to play a greater role in dealing with this type of litter problem.

21) Defra undertook a Final Regulatory Impact Assessment on the extension of Street Litter Control Notices in June 2007. This was as a response to the potential impact of the smoking ban on littering and its extension to cover office buildings. The Final Regulatory Impact Assessment noted that if local authorities were able to issue Street Litter Control Notices in respect of offices, and other venues, not currently covered by the provisions, it would give them the power to place greater responsibility onto the occupiers or owners of those premises to clean-up particularly the smoking-related litter in the area immediately around them, and/or install appropriate disposal facilities where there is a significant problem with this form of littering and where it is causing defacement of the area. It was further noted that this proposal is consistent with changes introduced by the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 which followed the polluter pays principle, by improving the powers available for local authorities to take action against those caught dropping litter as well as requiring businesses and landowners to play their part in keeping land and premises clean and in clearing-up.

22) A cost benefit analysis undertaken by Defra in the Final Regulatory Impact Assessment on extension of Street Litter Control Notices in June 2007 revealed that such a proposal would result in a net benefit to society overall, since Notices will only be issued in a minority of cases where there is a significant problem with smoking-related litter causing defacement of land on, or in the vicinity, of a street. The costs imposed on both local authorities and businesses would be relatively small and outweighed by the benefits associated with improved amenity, reduced cleaning costs from preventative measures and reduced fire risk.

23) We recommend that an amendment is inserted into the Bill to extend the list of premises to allow Street Litter Control Notices to be issued in respect of office premises where accumulations of litter can arise. To allow Notices to be issued in respect of any type of office premises, it is proposed to widen this definition to include all types of premises except exclusively residential premises. This has legal precedent in London where Street Litter Control Notice (SLCN) powers are currently being extended to office buildings by the London Local Authorities Bill Part 3 (6): Section 94(1)(a) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (c.43)(street litter: supplementary provisions) shall apply in Greater London as though for "commercial or retail premises" there were substituted "premises other than dwellings".

24) Additionally, Section 93(2) Environmental Protection Act 1990 states that the local authority may serve a Street Litter Control Notice 'on the occupier or, if the premises are unoccupied, on the owner of the premises'. Since office buildings may be under multiple occupancy, it is proposed to make an amendment specifying that Notices may be issued on the owner of any premises where there is multiple occupancy regardless of whether the premises are unoccupied. In these circumstances the owner would be in a position to put in place any requirements stated in the Notices, such as the requirement to make provision for disposal facilities, signage or additional street cleaning, and to transfer associated costs onto the relevant occupiers through, for example, service charges for the building. Non-compliance would then also be enforceable against the owner.

25) Keep Britain Tidy, therefore, recommends the following amendments are included in the Localism Bill:

In Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (litter etc) in section 94 (1)(a) (c.43) (street litter: supplementary provisions) for "commercial or retail premises" there were substituted "premises other than dwellings".

In Part IV of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (litter etc) in section 93 (2) (c.43) (Street litter control notices) after " the authority may serve a street litter control notice on the occupier or, if the premises are unoccupied, " insert " or where there is multiple occupancy".

Housing Ombudsman

26) Keep Britain Tidy has supported the Tenants Services Authority in the development of the 'Neighbourhood and Community' standard for social housing providers and we would welcome a statement supporting this vital work at the local level once the functions of the former Tenants Services Authority is transferred to the Regulation Committee of the Homes and Communities Agency.

London – Other functions

27) Keep Britain Tidy welcomes the proposals to ensure that streets developed in Mayoral Development Corporation can be transferred to the street works authority to prevent sites becoming orphaned areas which can attract local environmental quality problems such as graffiti and fly tipping which can blight local communities.

London – Greater London Governance

28) Keep Britain Tidy welcomes the proposals to introduce an obligation on the Mayor of London to produce the London Environment Strategy but is concerned by the lack of specific reference to local environmental quality and street cleansing which is a vital component of any such strategy.

29) We suggest the following amendment to this section:

In Section 351A (The London Environment Strategy) (3) (b) insert " street cleansing " following " municipal waste management "

February 2011