Agenda item

(To receive a report by Mark Taylor, North Kesteven District Council, which provides the Partnership with an opportunity to consider new guidance from the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP))

Consideration was given to a report which set out the new guidance from the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP).  The Partnership was informed that WRAP had recently issued two new guidance documents relating to recycling:

·         A Framework for Greater Consistency in Household Recycling in England (Consistency Guidelines)

·         Wrap Recycling Guidelines

It was reported that the Consistency Guidelines set out a vision where every household in England would recycle a common set of dry recyclable material and food waste, collected in one of three different ways.  The vision also included a move to a nationally consistent colour scheme for containers to simplify communications.  It was noted that the guidelines were not binding on local authorities and there was no current indication that they would be made binding in the future.

Members of the Partnership were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         The national guidance seemed like the right thing to do

·         The food waste issue needed to be part of the strategic consideration going forward

·         All recycling was currently co-mingled, and there was a need to be aware of this.  There may be a need to think about whether authorities continue to collect co-mingled recyclables, as Districts may fail TEEP assessments in future if the current levels of contamination continued.

·         WRAP needed to support authorities to assess business cases for implementing recycling collection services in line with the framework.  It was reported that West Lindsey District Council was working on an expression of interest for support from WRAP on behalf of the LWP.  It was hoped that there would be member buy-in, as it was felt that the business case would have more weight if it came from a group such as the Lincolnshire Waste Partnership.

·         It was queried what the implications of failing a TEEP assessment were.  Members were advised that to enable districts to collect co-mingled recycling there was a need to demonstrate that they could not do it any other way.  The worse the quality of the recycling collected gets, the harder it would be to justify the continued collection of co-mingled recyclables.

·         In relation to the vision for consistent colour schemes for bins, it would not be possible for districts to change bins, as the costs would be prohibitive.  It was suggested whether a county wide sticker to put on recycling bins would work.

·         It was commented that there were internationally recognised signs for recycling.

·         There had been a lot of research about stickers on bins carried out, and it had been found that the information needed to be in the house to have the greatest effect.

·         Recycling contamination cost the County Council approximately £1million per year, and it was suggested that if there was any reduction in contamination the authority could look at sharing any savings with the districts.

·         The long term benefits of reducing contamination would be a reduction of costs to the residents of Lincolnshire.

·         It was easier to reinforce a message when it was consistent.

·         There was also a need for consistency in timing.

·         If everyone in the Country had the same recycling mix it would be possible to communicate the message on a national basis, as there would only be one message to promote.

·         The biggest concern in relation to recycling and levels of contamination was that no operators would want to deal with the County Council, and so the only place to take the material would be out of county.  There was a need to carry out soft market testing with industry providers as soon as possible.

·         It was proposed to hold a 'Challenge Workshop' on tackling contamination in the New Year.

RESOLVED

1.    That a consistent dry recycling mix of materials, taking account of the Consistency Guidelines should be the aim of the next Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (JMWMS)

2.    That each constituent Council consider adopting the dry recycling mix in the Consistency Guidelines (as expanded by the Recycling Guidelines) as soon as practicable.

3.    That the future tendering processes for the processing of Mixed Dry Recycling be based on the dry recycling mix in the Consistency Guidelines (as expanded by the Recycling Guidelines).

4.    Subject to discussion with contractors, the Recycling Guidelines be used as the basis for future recycling/contamination publicity and campaigns by all constituent Council's.

5.    That the next JMWMS should include consideration of:

·         The implications of separate food waste collections and its disposal

·         The implications of potential changes to collection methodologies

·         The implications of developments in relation to consistent national colour schemes for waste containers

6.    That an Expression of Interest be collectively completed and submitted on behalf of the LWP, in order to apply for WRAP funding to develop business cases to work towards implementing changes to collection regimes.