Agenda item

(To receive a report by Matthew Michell, LCC Waste Strategy Manager, which provides the Partnership with an update on the suite of Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) which measure progress against the Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy)

Consideration was given to a report which updated the Partnership on the suite of Key Performance indicators (KPI’s) which measured progress against the vision and objectives set out in the LWP’s Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (JMWMS).  The KPI’s related to four strategic themes:

·       Waste hierarchy

·       Contamination

·       Carbon

·       Customer friendly

Partners were advised that in relation to performance figures, it was not yet clear whether this was the ‘new normal’ or if performance would return to pre-covid levels.  Changes to the quantity of waste being processed had been seen, and there had not yet been a significant upturn of waste going through the HWRC’s, even following the removal of the booking system. 

It was noted that there had been an increase in quantity of kerbside collections, but this was smaller than the overall reduction in tonnage going through the HWRC’s, so the amount of waste had reduced.  A decrease in tonnage per household had also been seen.

It was also noted that composting appeared to be down as well, but this was something which was affected by weather and conditions throughout the year.  It was also highlighted that there was a suggestion that the government planned to change how green waste collections were funded and if they were free to all residents, there may be more green waste collected.

It was reported that contamination levels were looking like they were lower than previously, this was partly due to the introduction of the twin stream project, but a reduction in contamination was also being seen in areas without the twin stream collection.

It was commented that fly tipping was still one of the biggest issues, and it was queried whether this was measured separately.  A discussion took place regarding fly-tipping and it was highlighted that it was important to disconnect fly-tipping from HWRC’s as it was very hard to evidence an established correlation.  The average resident who would pack their car to take the material to an HWRC was unlikely to then fly-tip that material if the HWRC was closed.  It was believed that there was a particular type of person who would still fly-tip even if HWRC’s were available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.  It was reported that people had been turned away from an HWRC with mattresses and rubble, and it was clarified that this had been due to a delay in skips being emptied, due to the HGV driver shortage.  It was hoped that this issue was now resolved. Staff did try to get messages out as soon as possible if a HWRC was unable to accept a particular type of waste in order to prevent unnecessary journeys.  It was queried whether a free bulky waste collection would help to reduce fly-tipping, and one partner advised that when a free bulky waste collection service had been offered, this did not show a reduction in fly-tipping.

It was suggested that one of the weighbridges at the waste transfer station was available, if Boston wished to make use of it when disposing of fly-tipped waste, then that data could be collated.

RESOLVED

          That the Lincolnshire Waste Partnership notes the charts and commentary provided in relation to each of the four Key Performance Indicator themes.