Waste – The Public’s View

Blogged earlier this evening on the Waste Panel I attended tonight and how it was in closed session. Later on in that meeting it was made clear that a certain part of the information was not restricted. That information was the responses to the public consultation on the future of waste collection.

It makes for some interesting reading on the responses received. The total number was 1959 split between 1486 completed online and 473 in paper form. This is in consultation terms a good response. It cost £1,900 for it to be completed. Some of the basic percentages of what was said are as follows:

46% of households stated that they would prefer to have a wheeled bin provided by the Council, with 33.8% saying that they would continue to provide their own sacks. Interestingly 20.2% said they don’t mind what containment they used for waste collection. A surprising point was that 46.9% stated that they strongly agree or agreed that residual waste could be carried out fortnightly if more dry recycling was collected and food waste was collected weekly. I thought this figure would be much lower considering the coverage fortnightly has received in the media over the last few years.

To back this up 71.4%  strongly disagree, or disagreed that residual waste collected could be continued to be collected weekly at an additional cost to  the Council or other services. 21.4% said they agreed, with 7.2% said they neither agreed nor disagreed.

As for kerbside recycling 8.4% said they never use kerbside recycling, but 16.8% said they use the recycling banks at supermarkets. The top 3 items that should be recycled are All Plastic Packaging, Drinks Cartons and All Types of Cardboard. 83.7% of responses said they recycled at least every 2 weeks, with 5.7% every 3-4 weeks.

It is when you get onto food waste that people tend to have a different opinion. 34.7% said  Very likely to use weekly food waste collection and 17.5% saying fairly likely. 26.3% said they would be very unlikely and 13.1% said unlikely. The don’t knows comes in at 8.5%.   So 52.2% would use this facility and 39.4% said they would not. It would be very interesting to know why the 39% would not use this facility.

There was a question on the practical barriers of having a wheeled bin. 64.9% said none, with the rest saying they would have problems ranging from steps, long driveway and access problems. The question needs to be asked and address is how we can solve the issues that other 35% have before we make the final decision.

A question was asked on the type of property that people lived in. 46% said they lived in a bungalow, or detached house, 24% a semi, 23.5% in a terraced house, 6.1% in a flat and 0.1% in  a caravan, temporary or mobile structure. As for the household type 48.1% of those who responded were a couple with no dependents. 15.9% single, 25.5% a couple with dependent children, 3.8% lone parent with dependent children and 6.8% other multi person households.

All in all this is a detailed response that should give those on the Panel plenty of food for thought before they make their recommendations to Cabinet (which they did tonight, but I cant say). Of course some people will say they don’t like it no matter what was proposed. I personally would like to see more items collected that are recycled like plastics, as my weekly bin is mostly filled with this type of plastic.

One comment

  • Anonymous

    i recycle everything i possibly can. but over the xmas had a lot of cans, the blue boxes wouldnt hold all the empties, so i put them in my black plastic bin and it wasnt emptied…when i rang to ask why i was told it was because it was "mixed"?!…when i explained that it wasnt there was just a lot of cans too many for the blue box i was told…well take it to the tip then!

    so why do i bother when they wont collect?

Please feel free to leave a comment to the post, as I like to hear your views! However, comments that do not meet the rules of the site (found in Blog Disclaimer) will not be published. Furthermore, all comment need to be approved by admin before publication.