Issue - meetings

Recycling Action Plan

Meeting: 12/04/2016 - Cabinet (Item 184)

184 Recycling Action Plan pdf icon PDF 70 KB

To consider the recommendations of the Waste & Recycling Panel and to approve a Recycling Action Plan and a Communication Strategy, and specific initiatives arising therefrom.

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED

 

(1)  That the Recycling Action Plan (Appendix 1) be endorsed.

(2)  That the introductory offer for new Garden Waste customers, as set out in paragraphs 5.2 to 5.5, be authorised.

(3)  That the appointment of two Recycling Project Officers be approved at an annual cost of £30,000 each to be funded from reserves for 2016/17 and subsequently added to the base budget for the duration of the project to March 2020.

 

(4)  That one-off funding of £50,000 from reserves be approved for communication initiatives and recycling guidance, including the production of bin stickers for residents, and that the Head of Contract Services be authorised to approve expenditure on communication initiatives.

 

(5)  That the Communication Strategy (Appendix 2) be approved.

Minutes:

The Cabinet considered the report circulated with the agenda (copy attached to the official minutes).

 

Mr Barrow introduced the report, reminding the Cabinet of the requirement to achieve a recycling target of 50% by 2020 and to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill. Failure to do so could result in fines, although the details of the penalty regime were not yet clear.

 

This represented a major challenge, as the Council’s current recycling rate was around 40%. The Waste and Recycling Panel was now ready to present its initial action plan, although this would grow and develop as time went on.

 

One opportunity would be to increase the take-up of garden waste collection. Around 20% of residents currently used this service, which contributed about 10% of the Council’s recycling. However, one neighbouring council had around 40% of residents using the service. It was, therefore, proposed to make an introductory offer of three months free subscription to residents who signed-up on-line with a direct debit mandate. There was no direct cost to the Council for this.

 

The key issue in the action plan was public education. Surveys had shown that up to 20% of material in the residual waste bins could have been re-cycled, and around 7% of material in the re-cycling bin should have been residual waste, and contaminated loads could be rejected. There were particular problems in the use of communal bins.

 

There seemed to be no cheap route to public education. The organisation WRAP (Waste and Recycling Action Programme) estimated that expenditure of £1 per household per year on communications was required to maintain continued engagement with existing services, and £2 per household per year when major new initiatives were being introduced.

 

The Waste and Recycling Panel had prepared a Communications Strategy (Appendix 2). The first step was a four-page spread in the Council’s Initiatives magazine, which had been distributed to the meeting. The strategy included engagement with large businesses, and Tesco had already been very helpful, and he hoped that the Observer series newspapers would help spread the message. The list of communications initiatives would be developed over time.

 

However, there was a need for increased resources and the report sought approval for the recruitment of two Recycling Project Officers whose duties were set out in paragraph 5.6 of the report, at a cost of about £30,000 each including on-costs. The report also sought funding of £37,000 from reserves for communications initiatives and recycling guidance, including the production of bin stickers.

 

Mr Riley (Contracts Manager) explained that re-cycling performance was complicated. The Council’s performance had remained level for the last few years because, although in 2014/15 more recyclables of higher quality had been collected, there had been an increase in residual waste, and the amount of garden waste collected had declined on the previous year which had been a good growing year.

 

There was a good participation rate from residents in the district and most recycled well but, of course, could always do better.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 184