Agenda item

Sonika Sidhu, Adviser, introduced this report with the aim of Members giving consideration to the challenges facing councils around providing effective waste and recycling services. To assist Members to have a complete picture about the future of waste and recycling three external speakers presented their views and experience to the board.

Jacob Hayler, Environmental Services Association, explained to the Board that his organisations view was that current waste and recycling targets being discussed by Europe will not get transposed onto the UK. Regarding recycling he expressed a view that it would require far greater investment or structural change going forwards. He informed the Board that in future the UK should move away from weight based targets. He emphasised that the targets currently being discussed are municipal waste as opposed to domestic waste. He also emphasised the opportunity to reform regulation around producer responsibility and that after the British exit of the EU the Environment Agency will have to completely review their policies.

The second speaker, Alison Ellison of the British Retail Consortium, gave particular emphasis to the importance of a circular economy and need for a long term vision. She supported Jacob in his view that weight based recycling should not continue. She also expressed a view that a consistent policy direction would continue to increase the quality and quantity of recycling and that retailers will continue to simplify packaging. Alison raised her concern around the risk of not having long term vision for the future and businesses having to deal with different policies for each country of the UK.

Andrew Pau, the Strategic Manager of Waste at Oxfordshire County Council, spoke to the Board as the final external speaker. He expressed his support for the concept of a circular economy and a view that Councils could see as a great opportunity to create jobs. He also raised concerns as to the recent stagnation of recycling and that the current target of 65% would be unattainable. He informed the Board that Councils need to change their focus from recycling and focus on waste minimisation and managing landfill. Lastly he expressed a view that local decision making powers within a national framework would be the best way forwards.

In the discussion that followed Members raised the following points;

·         Views were expressed in support of ascertaining a new way in which we measure recycling.

·         Members also showed support for favouring waste minimisation going forwards.

·         A view was expressed that Councils would need clear and consistent recycling targets.

·         A view was expressed that recycling and waste minimisation need to be included in the Government’s energy strategy.

·         Members were of the view that the LGA should continue to lobby for greater producer and manufacturer responsibility.

·         A concern was raised that Local Government would need to be careful if focusing more on waste minimisation to not be viewed as reducing their ambition regarding recycling.

Decision

The Chairman summarised the Board’s views on the questions that were raised by the report and explored in the Board discussion as follows.

Regarding whether recycling had naturally plateaued the Board agreed that discussion around recycling needed to move beyond the national targets and consider the broader concept of waste minimisation and how this could be delivered.

Members saw the recycling market as being unpredictable and wanted to further understand the potential for the reuse and recovery of energy. There was clear agreement that the LGA continues to lobby for greater producer responsibility and the overall reduction of packaging.

Regarding models of more efficient waste and recycling services for the future, the Board agreed there wasn’t any single best model. Council’s value having local flexibility so that they can deliver the right kind of service. In many cases this means working with neighbouring authorities. Post Britain leaving the EU councils want local control over how they collect and dispose of waste. A prescriptive national model was not seen as the answer.  A discussion about pay as you throw should be considered for a future meeting.

In regards to the medium to long term risks for waste and recycling services the Board were of the view that these were unclear as the Government is yet to articulate its 25 year Environment Plan and still needs to develop a Resource Management strategy. It was agreed that it would be unhelpful if the 4 nations started developing their own strategies as it would be important for there to be synergy across any long term policies. It was recognised that some form of targets would be useful to drive continuous improvement, but that these shouldn’t be so directive that they stifle the performance of councils. The EU target needed to be replaced with something that fits local needs. It was also suggested that the food waste bill needs further consideration.

Regarding thepost EU Exit aspiration for this service area and what the balance between a national policy and local flexibility should be the Chairman stated that until the current rules are repatriated this would remain an open question. Some Members highlighted that our exiting of the EU offers up the opportunity to redefine the target framework for waste and recycling services. Members asked officers to look at alternative methods for measuring recycling and looking at what waste minimisation would mean in practise.

Action

Officers will incorporate the Boards views into  our EU exit lobby position.