Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submits a report providing an overview of waste services provided by the City Council’s Waste Management Services and highlights some of the challenges facing those services.  The Commission is recommended to comment on the services provided, noting the challenges facing the service.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submitted a report providing an overview of services provided by the City Council’s Waste Management Services and highlighting some of the challenges facing those services.

The Waste Services Manager gave a presentation providing an overview of Waste Management Services, a copy of which is attached at the end of these minutes for information.  The following points were made during this presentation:

·           The Council had approximately 60 recycling banks throughout the city;

·           Biffa, the Council’s contractor, owned and sold the materials recovered from the waste collected, so was able to sell them to the markets from which  it would gain the best price;

·           As part of the service’s education and promotion work, a trial was underway in conjunction with the British Heart Foundation charity to provide bring banks in student areas, to encourage students moving out of their accommodation at the end of the university year to donate unwanted goods, rather than throw them away;

·           Two breakdowns at the Biffa plants last year meant that the recycling and composting rate was likely to be approximately 35%, instead of the usual 40%.  This was below the rate required by the contract (38%), so would result in a penalty being payable by Biffa.  This penalty was the cost in landfill tax on the difference between the rate achieved and the target.  This rate was applied, as the items not recycled were sent to landfill instead;

·           Although Biffa was complying with the permit to operate the Bursom Ball Mill plant, complaints were still being received from residents about odour from the plant; and

·           Under a European agreement, a 65% recycling rate needed to be achieved by 2030.  This would not be achievable through the Council’s current waste management contracts, so a review of those services would have to be undertaken.

The following points were then made in discussion:

o    Under the terms of the current waste management contract, the main risk of recycling rates reducing was a risk to the contractor (Biffa), not the Council, but the Council would be liable for any increase in landfill tax that resulted;

o    The government was considering a waste resources plan that could include ideas such as refunds being given for recycling drinks cans;

o    Although the Council did not want to encourage food wastage, it wanted food waste for digesters, from which electricity could be produced;

o    The Waste Services team worked with the City Wardens to reduce fly tipping.  This included leafleting targeted areas about the Council’s bulky waste collection service when incidences of fly tipping were discovered.  The Deputy City Mayor with responsibility for Environment, Public Health and Health Integration reminded Members that consideration had been given in the past to the potential to charge for the bulky waste collection service, but it had been decided that it should remain free for most collections;

o    Some of the black refuse bins did not contain much waste when they were emptied, which showed the success of the orange bag recycling scheme.  It was recognised that households in some parts of the city would have problems if their waste collections were reduced from weekly, (for example, due to the size of properties and family sizes);

o    Some local authorities had very high rates of recycling.  If they had less frequent waste collections, this encouraged recycling, due to less space being available in bins;

o    Biffa had improved its plant in the United Kingdom, which had helped reduce the amount of waste it sent abroad for disposal;

o    The Deputy City Mayor with responsibility for Environment, Public Health and Health Integration advised that the Sustainability Action Plan included a vision for waste.  Work on this would start shortly and would include consideration of how the service would be operated after the current contract ended;

o    Paan spitting was of concern, but was a cleansing issue, falling outside the remit of the waste management contract.  However, it was noted that the City Wardens could issue Fixed Penalty Notices for this;

o    It was envisaged that funding would be realigned during 2018/19 to take account of the effects of legislative changes.  These changes had affected the material coming out of the Wanlip anaerobic digester, as more now had to go to landfill, so the Council was paying more landfill tax.  All other waste management processes and practices remained unchanged; and

o    Customer satisfaction was a key indicator of the success of the waste management contract.  This currently stood at over 95%.

AGREED:

1)    That the Director of Environmental and Neighbourhood Services be asked to submit a report to this Commission at an appropriate time on the use of “bring banks” in student areas and their success in reducing waste collections required at the end of the university year;

2)    That the Director of Environmental and Neighbourhood Services be asked to review the work being done to reduce paan spitting in city streets; and

3)    That the Scrutiny Policy Officer be asked to contact all members of the Commission to remind them of the arrangements being made to visit the Bursom ball mill and/or the Wanlip anaerobic digester.