Council considers speeding up fines system for waste and recycling
Anthony Lewis, local democracy reporter
More people who fail to dispose of their waste and recycling properly could face council fines under plans to streamline the current system.
Merthyr Tydfil council is considering moving from a three-stage to a two-stage process when it comes to enforcement on the incorrect presentation of waste and recycling, meaning potential £300 fines could happen sooner than they do at present.
Under the current system when a household offends for the first time a red tag is placed on the bin.
A letter is also sent to the property explaining the need to recycle as much waste as possible and how to do so. If there is a second offence on other collection days then a red tag is again placed on the bin and a section 46 notice is sent to the resident.
This relates to section 46 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 on the incorrect presentation of waste.
Fine
If an offence is committed a third time then a red tag is again placed on the bin and a fine of £300 is delivered to the householder and failure to pay the fine may result in prosecution.
The new proposal, if agreed by councillors would remove the initial letter stage from the process so the first offence would result in a section 46 notice being served instead.
A report to full council on Wednesday, January 8, says reducing the number of stages in the enforcement process should result in higher recycling rates and lower residual waste collected as well as a potential increase in income.
It said that to achieve the Welsh Government`s increased recovery target of 70% the number of of households in the county borough that recycle or only partially recycle “has to improve”.
It said the current enforcement procedure is judged to be effective so far but needs to change to further encourage residents to comply with the enforcement policy and help achieve the new Welsh Government target.
Public compliance
The report said it was anticipated the number of fines served should increase when the first educational stage is removed and better public compliance in the recycling service should be realised due to the potential fine stage happening sooner.
It said that the main driver for this policy change was to achieve the recovery target but it would also have the benefit of increasing income from additional recyclables as well as reducing the cost of sending residual waste to energy from waste (EFW).
Based on 2023-24 annual data the council could have generated £42,300 by removing the first stage of the enforcement process.
The figures show total income from the three-stage process was £4,800 but it could have been £42,300 with a two-stage process.
The report said the level of impact will rely significantly on the public`s reaction as if the levels of non-compliance remain the same then the increased income should be realised.
And if the public comply more due to the threat of quicker enforcement of offenders then the recycling income and savings on reduced residual waste treatment will be realised along with the improvement in the recycling target.
The report said that the most likely outcome is a combination of both scenarios.
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
Could you sue the Council for breach of contract when they have failed to collect recycling bins, for 3 weeks on a promised weekly collection service, even when they programmed a revised date and failed to collect in our village, the Council Tax payers make payment expecting the services paid for to be delivered.
Maybe a non collection compensation scheme should be mandatory.
This change at MTC is purely financially driven
Carmarthenshire currently has co-mingled recycling and had a 72% recycling rate, best in Wales. Councils which operate segregated recycling regime, like Blaenau Gwent who use trolley block system, have much lower recycling rates. It relates to public compliance and ease of doing the right thing. Fines are only needed when recycling becomes harder to do.
Note – First became acquainted with the trolley block recycling system in Sweden in the 1990s. However, the municipality builds collection compounds at the end of every street at huge capital cost and the ‘hutch’ is mandatory on new builds in the planning system. The new EV charging station laws in 2020 also follows this pattern. You cannot just mandate a system without providing a way of the public complying with it.
Anything like Bridgend council and they should be fining themselves after the mess left after they have been through. (not blaming the crews, they are one a time limit I expect).