Agenda item - Opposition Business - The current aesthetics in the borough, wheeled bins and bulk waste collection

Agenda item

Opposition Business - The current aesthetics in the borough, wheeled bins and bulk waste collection

An issues paper prepared by the Opposition Group is attached for the consideration of Council.

 

The Council Procedure Rules relating to Opposition Business are also attached for information.

Minutes:

Councillor Laban introduced the issues paper, prepared by the Opposition Group.  Issues highlighted were as follows:

 

1.         Keeping the boroughs streets clean was a statutory responsibility for the Council and was important not only in terms of resident’s health and wellbeing but also in terms of the quality of the environment and how the Council was judged as a local authority.

 

2.      The need to recognise the impact of environmental issues on the borough “brand” and how any deterioration in the service, particularly in relation to waste collection and street cleansing would affect perceptions amongst residents, customers and potential investors about the Council’s ability to deliver its core service and manage large scale projects and functions.

 

3.      The need to ensure that the boroughs streets were kept clean and free from fly tipping in order to reinforce the fact that Enfield remained a good place to live, work, visit and do business.

 

4.      Concerns had been identified about the current standard of street cleansing along with levels of fly tipping across the borough, supported by images provided within the Opposition Business paper.  Fly tipping rates had been rising year on year since 2012 with the Council also failing to meet its own residual waste target level, according to the most recent Quarterly Performance monitoring report.

 

5.      Whilst it was anticipated that the Majority Group would highlight reductions in Government funding in response to their paper the Opposition Group felt the impact of the following policies introduced by the current Administration also needed to be highlighted:

·                Increase in fees for the bulky waste collection service;

·                Change in operating procedures at the Barrowell Green Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC);

·                Introduction of a charge for providing large wheeled bins

 

6.      In addition the Opposition Group felt that the current arrangements for reporting incidents of fly tipping were over complicated and not customer friendly, with the recently established social media campaign #cleanupenfield given as an example of how the process could be made more customer friendly and streamlined.

 

As a result of these issues the Opposition Group had identified the following actions, recommended within their Business Paper as a means to achieve the improvements felt necessary to Enfield’s street scene:

 

(a)     make it easier for the public to report fly tipping via social media, website, phone and email;

 

(b)     take a strategic approach to areas where fly tipping was happening on a recurring basis;

 

(c)     install cameras where fly tipping was prevalent;

 

(d)     ensure greater integration between Environment and the Council Housing fly tip crews;

 

(e)     introduce a fly tipping amnesty day where people could leave bulky waste out for collection free of charge;

 

(f)      review fees and charges for bulky waste collection to make it more affordable to use the service;

 

(g)     issue a clear communication message to fly tippers that enforcement action would be taken

 

(h)     establish a community engagement campaign on the right way to dispose of rubbish.

 

Councillor Anderson, Cabinet Member for Environment, responded on behalf of the Majority Group highlighting:

 

1.         The need to recognise that fly tipping was an issue not only within the borough but also nationally, with a recent review by the Communities and Local Government Select Committee highlighting a national increase of 20% with two thirds of the rubbish being household waste and a resulting increase in costs for local authorities of 24%.

 

2.      Enfield was currently spending £4.3m on services to keep the borough clean and spent the 5th highest amount in terms of efforts to clear fly tipping. In contrast, he highlighted how the Government had stopped funding the Keep Britain Tidy campaign.

 

3.      The investment of £1m by the current Administration in modernising street cleaning services compared to the reduction in overall spending by the Opposition Group when they were in power.

 

4.      The outcome of a recent independent review highlighting a significant improvement in the efforts to keep streets clean since the Administration had come to power in 2010, which it was felt contradicted the accusation that Enfield was a dirty place to live.

 

5.      The Administration were not, however, complacent about the action needed to ensure the boroughs streets remained clean, with the following activities given as example of action either taken or planned:

·                deployment of additional resources for enforcement activities;

·                introduction of a new management contract for the HWRC, increasing the tonnage that could be collected;

·                plans being developed to reopen a HWRC in the east of the borough, following closure of the previous site by the Opposition Group when last in power;

 

6.      The need to recognise the role of private landlords and commercial organisations in also tackling fly tipping on land owned by them.  It was pointed out that some of the images included within the Opposition Business paper were actually of privately owned sites.

 

7.      The concerns highlighted in relation to the reporting process for fly tipping were also rejected, with the use of the on-line system seen as the most cost effective and efficient process. In addition the Council was also looking at more innovative solutions including geo tagging as an option.

 

8.      The strategic nature of the approach being taken by the current Administration towards tackling fly tipping and street cleansing, which included a range of communication, education and enforcement activities.  Hotspots were already being identified and regularly patrolled with CCTV also used to assist and the integration of Council housing within the Environment Department would also assist in the joining up of street cleansing operations.  A free collection service was also available for furniture and white goods within the borough.

 

9.      The correlation between the level of charges for bulky waste collection and fly tipping was also rejected, given the national increase in rates identified and fact that the boroughs with some of the highest fly tipping rates offered a free collection service.

 

It was felt that the actions identified demonstrated the proactive approach being taken by the Council towards tackling fly tipping and ensuring its streets remained clean.  The assertion that Enfield was not a clean place to live was rejected, with Enfield having received various awards including one from Clean Britain for its cleansing service.

 

Other issues raised during the debate were as follows:

 

(a)     The need highlighted by members of the Opposition Group:

 

·                to ensure that the reporting mechanisms for fly tipping and other waste collection or street cleansing issues were as streamlined, simple and accessible for residents to use as possible.

 

·                To recognise the impact created by the increase in charges for the bulky waste collection service in terms of affordability and an increase in levels of fly tipping.  Whilst generating additional income this would be offset by an increase in costs associated with having to tackle rubbish being dumped illegally.

 

·                To recognise what was felt to have been the increase in enforcement powers made available to local authorities to tackle these issues.

 

·                To recognise the benefits of social media as an effective additional reporting mechanism.

 

(b)     the concern expressed by members of the Opposition Group at:

 

·                what was felt to be the limited value for money achieved as a result of the funding allocated to address these issues by the current Administration; and

 

·                at the fact that it had not been possible for the Cabinet Member to provide a detailed written response to Council Question 49 on the agenda, relating to the number of items for disposal collected by waste services direct from residents homes over the past 5 years.

 

(c)     the need identified by members of the Majority Group:

 

·                to recognise the commitment and efforts being made to keep Enfield clean and negative impact it was felt the #cleanupenfield campaign was having in terms of undermining the boroughs reputation.

 

·                To recognise the current performance levels in relation to waste collection with 84% of fly tip incidents being cleared before they were reported and the remaining 16% being cleared within 4 hours.

 

·                The current difficulty in terms of enforcement powers to tackle commercial fly tipping and fly tipping on private land and need identified for further action to lobby Government for increased powers and a more effective and speedier enforcement process.

 

·                To recognise action already being taken to identify and tackle fly tipping “hotspots” and for further action to lobby Government to reduce the burden of proof in relation to the use of CCTV footage as evidence in relation to prosecutions.

 

·                To recognise that whilst fly tipping was endemic across the country, Enfield already had one of the best records in the country in terms of tackling the issue.

 

·                To understand the way in which social media such as Twitter was currently used and the limited scope and level of resource required to monitor campaigns such as #cleanupenfield in order for them to be effective as a reporting mechanism.

 

Councillor Neville summed up, on behalf of the Opposition Group, by recognising that whilst fly-tipping was a growing national problem there was a need to focus on addressing the situation in Enfield in the first instance.  The Opposition Group felt there was a need for the Administration to review the policies in place in terms of not only the level of fees being charged but also making reporting as easy and accessible as possible.  It was felt a more strategic approach was required involving the identification and targeted action to address trends and “hotspots” in terms of where regular fly tipping was occurring.  The use of CCTV would help but it was felt consideration also needed to be given to either removing or reducing the fees currently charged for bulky waste collection to make it more affordable and reduce the incentive to dump waste along with the use of amnesty days.  Robust enforcement was also required, with a clear message provided that action would be taken, including for the owners of private land.  The recommendations put forward within the Opposition business paper had all be designed to reflect these aims and were therefore recommended for approval.

 

In response, Councillor Taylor (Leader of the Council) felt that all members would agree as a shared objective, in the need to tackle the growing problem of fly tipping both on a local and national level.  It was felt, however, that policies developed needed to be on an evidence based approach with the example of the closure of the Carterhatch HWRC having been seen to contribute to increased levels of fly tipping in that area of the borough.  The current Administration had therefore pledged to develop plans to open a second HWRC site in the east of the borough.  The correlation made by the Opposition Group in relation to levels of charges for waste collection and fly tipping was also challenged, with examples provided of authorities offering free collection services with some of the highest fly tipping rates in London.  Whilst supportive of the need for a national litter strategy, the approach adopted within Enfield had resulted in the Council being able to demonstrate one of the best records in the country for dealing with the problem and tribute was paid to staff for their hard work in delivery of the service.  The outcome of a recent Communities and Local Government Select Committee review was also highlighted, along with comments made by the Keep Britain Tidy Group in terms of the lack of a clear national framework and strategy by the Government for tackling the problem.  For these reasons the recommendations in the Opposition Business paper were not supported

 

As an outcome of the debate the Leader of the Opposition requested that a vote be taken on the following recommendations within the Opposition Business Paper:

 

That the Administration:

 

(1)     make it easier for the public to report fly tipping via social media, website, phone and email;

 

(2)     take a strategic approach to areas where fly tipping was happening on a recurring basis;

 

(3)     install cameras where fly tipping was prevalent;

 

(4)     ensure greater integration between Environment and the Council Housing fly tip crews;

 

(5)     introduce a fly tipping amnesty day where people can leave bulky waste out for collection free of charge;

 

(6)     review fees and charges for bulky waste collection to make it more affordable to use the service;

 

(7)     issue a clear communication message to fly tippers that enforcement action will be taken

 

(8)     establish a community engagement campaign on the right way to dispose of rubbish.

 

The above recommendations were put to the vote and not approved, with the result as follows:

 

For: 19

Against: 34

Abstentions: 0

Supporting documents: