RECYCLING SACKS APPROVED

Wokingham Borough Council executive meeting, Friday, September 11 Special two-page report by PHIL CREIGHTON

WOKINGHAM Borough residents are to see their black boxes for recycling replaced with plastic sacks in a bid to save the council’s finances – but there is no start date yet as the order cannot be placed until tomorrow at the earliest.

Under the plans, each household will receive two sacks and their black boxes recycled – it’s planned to turn them into benches.

Although the new scheme has been under discussion since July, the go ahead was only given at a specialmeeting of the ruling executive, held online on Friday evening.

But a row remains over the time it has taken to implement the decision, with the Liberal Democrats saying that it is irritating that they are being blamed for the two-month delay in ordering, while the Conservatives said that if the party had not made a decision to ‘call-in’ the proposal, the bags would be arriving in time for the wettermonths of the year.

The bags are needed because China, a major importer of recyclablewaste, has said that it will no longer accept wet materials. As the existing boxes are open topped and most residents leave them out overnight before collection, colder weather and dewey mornings will see the waste materials dampen.

The Executive had hoped to purchase the sacks following the July 30 meeting, but the Liberal Democrats argued that without a business case in place it couldn’t be proved that this was the right decision. The callin was debated at a special overview and scrutiny committee meeting last month, and the executive’s decision upheld by the Conservativemajority committee.

Although the business case had been planned for discussion at the September 24 executive meeting, it was brought forward to a special executive on Friday, September 11, as each additional week’s delay meant that the council would be losing money as it couldn’t recycle the existing wet waste.

Residents ask questions

Before the decision was made, there were a number of questions from both the public and councillors.

Chris Johnson wanted to find out more about the lifespan of the recycling sacks. He pointed out that the agenda said that this was between three and five years, not five-and-a-half years as previously stated or 13.3 years as indicated by the financial weighting in the options appraisal.

Responding, Cllr Parry Batth, the executive member for environment and leisure (pictured right), said that hewas unsure where the 13-and-a-half year figure came from.

He added: “I can confirm that the life expectancy of the bags is five years as per the manufacturers’ experience. However, they can last beyond five years.”

Mr Johnson said that he believed that the lifespan was an assumption and that the plastic boxes were sturdier.

Beth Rowland – a former councillors – was the next person, who wanted to know how the council had consulted with representatives from protected characteristic groups for completion of the Equality Impact Assessment on the proposed ‘hessian’ recycling bags and what their input was.

Cllr Batth said that testing has shown that the empty bags weigh less than the current boxes so will be easier to handle.

“I amtherefore confident that these new containers are convenient, practicable and in some ways easier to use for those who are elderly or have a disability,” he said.

Ms Rowland responded by saying that she would have problems opening velcro, and wanted to know what provisions were being made by similarly affected residents.

Cllr Batth pledged to discuss a solution ‘offline’ and away from the meeting, a suggestion welcomed byMs Rowland.

Council leader Cllr John Halsall also promised that the council would do what it could to help people.

Ian Shenton wanted to know if the sacks would provide value for money if the procurement for them was handled by Veolia and not the council.

“The contract works on a number of key criteria including transparency and partnership working,” Cllr Batth responded. “Wokingham Borough Council would see all prices which are paid and ensure we are getting best value on all containers that we purchase through the contract.”

This included having “significant” procurement influence that would help the council.

“An additional advantage of utilising Veolia is that the management of risk lies with them so in the unlikely event of an issue it will be Veolia to be liable for and resolve rather than the Council,” Cllr Batth added.

Cllr Halsall said his officers “had a good idea what the market price is”.

Mike Smith added: “Please can you explain how you justify to the residents of Wokingham, not doing any practical trials with residents before spending over a quarter of a million pounds in capital with additional annual costs of £235,000 as the business case is not, to my mind, as a retired technical auditor, comprehensive, robust and compelling.”

He also told Mr Smith that the bags were “the best shortterm solution to wet waste to both save the Council money and increase recycling”.

Cllr Halsall said residents seemed to be happy with blue bags and food waste collection, but the market for recycling has changed “and got more picky”, the rejection of the wet recyclingwas a cost of £600,000 a year.

The lids seem an obvious solution but the collection crews had said it would be a nightmare, Cllr Halsall continued.

“We recognise it’s a compromise, we’ve taken the best advice,” he said. “We have to in current straightened circumstances have to do something about £600,000 down the drain. Covid has hit our balance sheet very hard and we’re in a recovery situation, and we just have to do something.”

Opposition councillors’ probe

There was then a period for opposition councillors to ask questions. These all came from Liberal Democrats.

Cllr Sarah Kerr said that the party supported the need to do something: “It has been highlighted that there are serious flaws in the options appraisal that could materially change the outcome of the report. Why is this same options appraisal still being used when it's clearly flawed?”

Cllr Parry Batth hit back, saying, “Your question is not specific, nor cites an example. However, based on your question at Overview and Scrutiny on August 26, I am deducing that this is around the ‘write-off’/lifespan of the respective containers.”

Cllr Kerr said that it was one of the areas.

“Given that the scrutiny committee supported the recommendations of the report, I am unclear how you can make this assertion,” Cllr Batth continued. “I can confirm that the life expectancy of the bags is five years as per the manufacturers’ testing and delivery experience. They anticipate a lifespan more than this but have identified a prudent timeframe.”

Cllr Kerr also queried the capacity of the sacks and asked why the council had taken so long to act over wet waste. She said that the trial didn’t happen in two wards, and it would have been responsible to have carried out such a trial.

Cllr Batth said that the council’s “very experienced” officers helped with the decision-making process, with the sacks considered to be “very effective”.

Cllr Clive Jones, the Lib Dem’s deputy leader, who wanted to know what evidence there was that only one additional vehicle and crew was needed for the sacks.

“There is no supporting evidence in the options report,” he said.

Cllr Batth said: “In parallel with the work undertaken by the consultants, officers conducted further researchwith the collection contractor Veolia.

“These discussions highlighted that it would take approximately three seconds extra for the bags to be emptied. As is, the boxes take on average six seconds per property to empty and return. It was modelled that the bags would take nine seconds which would mean an additional 40 hours of work per week to cover which equates to an additional vehicle and crew.”

He added that the shower caps and lids would need another additional vehicle and that the annual cost of a crew and maintenance would be £235,000.

“If we did nothing, then the impact on budgetswould equate to £600,000 per annum due to the wet waste issue,” he added.

Cllr Jones again pressed for evidence in the reports presented to the meeting.

“Would you agree that if the extra three seconds is wrong, and it was nearer to five or six seconds the cost to the council would be another £235,000?”

Cllr Batth said that trialswere undertaken to show how long the bags take to empty.

Cllr Paul Fishwick wanted to know the impact on the other local authorities that use sacks.

Responding, Cllr Halsall said: “Due to the time constraints given on this question, the additionalwork required to fully inform the response could not be undertaken. Therefore, this work will be conducted and reported back once complete.”

But an angry Cllr Fishwick hit back: “It was submitted quite some time ago – that was ridiculous. This was submitted on time on Monday.

Cllr Fishwick added: “I can tell you what the answer is – zero.”

One council only started their new scheme on August 3.

“This is absolutely disgraceful,” he said.

Cllr Prue Bray pointed out that Monmouth County Council have been asking its residents to separate recyclables into different bags.

“It is surprising that there does not appear to be any consideration of stopping co-mingling in the options considered in Wokingham. Why was this not looked at?”

“By utilising the bags, the paper material will remain dry and there will not be any contamination issues due towet paper,” Cllr Batth said. “Therefore, there is no need to collect the respective materials separately.”

Cllr Caroline Smith wanted to know if there was evidence that the sacks would be used for additional recycling by residents.

“If nothing was done to mitigate the wet paper issue, then the loss of recycling would be 6% off the current recycling rate – 54% to 48%,” Cllr Batth said.

“It is evident from the blue bag compositional analysis of what is thrown away that good recyclate is being disposed of and every item needs to be captured in order to meet our climate change and recycling objectives.”

He pledged a comprehensive education campaign to residents when the sacks are introduced to boost recycling rates.

“We encourage all residents to recycle and each household will receive two bags and, if required, residents can opt for additional bags if needed,” he said.

Executive decisions

Cllr Halsall then asked Cllr Batth to introduce the motion to adopt the proposal to mitigate against wet paper which would see the bags introduced.

Cllr Richard Dolinski said that the business case stated that the black boxes would be collected but he couldn’t see how much it would cost: £28,000 was the response.

Cllr John Kaiser said that the budget situation was well known and that the council had spent a lot of money employing professional officers with the right expertise.

“This isn’t something we’ve made up as members, it’s gone through professional officers,” he said of the case of saving money by using the sacks. “We would be foolhardy to go against their advice,” he warned.

Cllr Wayne Smith said that the council had no control over the world recycling market, and that the council’s officers were some of the best in class, praising Peter Baveystock for doing a fantastic job handling the council’s waste and recycling and that they had come up with the best solution possible.

Cllr Halsall wanted to reiterate much of what Cllr Kaiser had said, adding that “we are not trying to make an investment, we’re trying to save money”.

The action over the sacks came as soon as they had received the consultant’s reports, and that they were trying to look after their residents’ money.

“Anyone can take the report and say why didn’t you do this… it’s pitiful point scoring, I regret we have time to time,” he said. “We do need to get onwith it,” he said.

“We’ve got to rely on our professional expertise and our officers, we can’t just make it up as we go along … there is best practise, we really need to make that decision quickly. That is what we are doing.

“There is no perfect solution to these problems, it’s something we hadn’t foreseen two or three years ago, no one could have predicted China doing what they did. But we have to take the world as we find out.

“£600,000 pays for a lot of children’s services and adult services,” he said, adding that Covid had caused a drain on the council finances, and he feels that “we cannot afford to waste that money”.

He added: “This is an interim solution, we are looking at a

long-term solution, we are ambitious, and we do want the Lib Dems to be involved in that. It will probably lead to a radical change in what we do – zero waste to landfill is a really ambitious project, this is just a milestone in that project.”

The paper was taken to the executive in July for

“transparency”, and he recommended that the executive approved the proposal.

Cllr Jones criticised this stance, but Cllr Halsall said that he had published the report as soon as they had received it and the call-in decision had stopped the process.

They nowneeded to go ahead “without further impediment”.

A virtual show of hands was taken of the executive, which carried the motion.

This means that Wokingham Borough Council residents will now have their black boxes replaced by the plastic sacks.

The aftermath

Liberal Democrat deputy leader Cllr Clive Jones was not happy with his party being accused of holding up the decision-making process.

“John Halsall keeps saying that we’ve cost the council money – we haven’t,” he said. “If we had had all the information that was made available at Friday’s meeting for the executive on July 30, as it should have been, then those bags could have been ordered six weeks ago and the council would be better off by nearly £100,000.

“If we’d had all the information, we wouldn’t have called it in, we wouldn’t have had a case for it. Even though we don’t think much of the information that came out the other night, we would have had to have said, ‘This poor bit of information is better than nothing’.”

Cllr Jones was also unhappy with the treatment that Cllr Fishwick received over his question.

“I thought it was actually absolutely disgraceful. He had submitted his question on Monday, so the officers ahd at least four working days to give an answer. My theory is that the answer was not acceptable to the Conservative leadership, so they decided not to give an answer.

“To be dismissed out of hand was just not acceptable.”

And concerns remain about how accessible the bags will be to people with additional needs or disabilities.

“They are valid concerns and they haven’t been addressed properly,” he said.

The bags will be going ahead, and Cllr Jones acknowledges that this is the solution for the next five years, but felt that the council needed to look nowfor a longer term solution for when the contract expires.

“We have to do a trial to see if shower caps, or plastic bin lids are more effective, as I don’t think too many people will give up their plastic boxes,” he said, adding that if the Liberal Democrats were running the council this is what they would do, using a couple of wards for each trial.

“I don’t know if we’d consider wheelie bins, we’ve just agreed to lease the trucks, and using wheelie bins would mean a major change. We would certainly be asking the consultants to have a look and see if that was something we should be doing in four or five years’ time.”

He added: “Residents have told us that the sacks have been the usual shambles they have come to expect over the last few years from the Conservatives.”

But Wokingham Borough Council leader Cllr John Halsall stuck to his guns, saying that both Conservatives and Lib Dems had worked well together during the first lockdown phase.

“They don’t seem to have an understanding that the call-in was unnecessary,” he said. “We worked so well together in the past, that if they felt they wanted more information I would have given it to them – they just had to ask for it. It was not necessary to have the theatre of a call-in which has delayed what we’re trying to do.

“The sacks have a huge lead time, and the effect of the call-in was thatwe lost our place in the queue, we’re having to start again. Potentially, we’re looking at missing the best part of this winter and all the inherent cost that goes with it.

“The new order cannot go in until five working days after the executive meeting – that’s tomorrow. It is really disappointing, we were in the queue, we could have had the bags here by September or October.

“It’s easy to pick holes in any paper – you don’t have to be that bright to find, in any (business) case something which you can argue about. But I would have hoped that we could have had a more constructive approach.”

He added that there was no perfect solution to the recycling problem that the borough’s problems, “particularly given the historic stance of Wokingham in terms of blue bags and boxes, and an aversion to wheelie bins. But even if that didn’t exist, we had to buy a completely new fleet of vehicles for the food waste collections. We can’t abandon that fleet without paying a penalty, which could be several million pounds. “It’s not an option for us.” He added: “That’s why we engage with consultants and external parties, to supplement the view of our officers.”