Question to Medway full Council meeting October 2016
Question to Medway full council meeting held 13th October 2016
Tony Jeacock of Rainham and former chair of Medway LibDems asked the Portfolio Holder for Front Line Services, Cllr. Filmer, the following:
"Since Medway Council's introduction of the £25 fee for the collection of larger items of refuse, which many people can ill afford, the instances of local fly-tipping are on the increase, thus spoiling the local residential environment for others and potentially attracting vermin.
Not only does this deter discerning people from moving into the area, it can potentially serve to drive equally discerning people out in an endeavour to relocate to a more attractive area. In the meantime the regularly fly-tipped area goes further downhill, added to which it becomes a health hazard to the local community.
Given that many such items of refuse are too large to transport to the local refuse tip in the back of a car and given that the local refuse tips do not permit access for towed trailers or vans, will the Portfolio Holder consider either dropping the £25 fee altogether, or perhaps reducing it significantly, thereby helping people to help themselves in maintaining an environment to be proud of throughout the Medway Towns, and if not, why not?"
Cllr. Filmer stated that the standard fee for this service was £20, not £25 and this fee covered up to three items. This charge was comparable to or below typical fees charged across England and Wales.
He stated that he thought it would be helpful to explain the background to the introduction of this fee. It was part of a package of proposals in the budget setting process to help maintain the delivery of the Council's front line services. There was never an expectation that the introduction would reduce fly-tipping, and the Council would be reporting on the effect the fee may have had on fly-tipping once there was a year's worth of data to analyse.
He stated that the Council provided an extremely generous waste service offer: three household waste sites, weekly kerbside collections and a free-to-use garden waste collection service. This offer was the envy of many and was far in excess of what was available elsewhere.
He also stated that it was worth reminding fly-tippers that their actions were against the law and if caught, the Council would prosecute.
NOTE:
Due to the recent withdrawal of the facility to put a supplementary question related to the original question at such Council meetings (thereby making it more difficult to hold the Council to account), I was not able to respond to Cllr. Filmer's prepared answer. Had I been able to, I would have stated:
"Regardless as to whether the sum is £20 or £25 covering up to three such items, many people will only have one such item to dispose of for which they can ill afford to pay £20. You said that the introduction of the fee was not expected to reduce the instances of fly-tipping. Well of course it wouldn't, quite the reverse in fact. How astute does one have to be to realise that simple fact? And if fly-tipping was not part of the original equation, why then will you be conducting an analysis on the effect the fee may have had on fly-tipping after the gathering of a year's data?
Whilst I commend the Council for our weekly kerbside collection service, this does not address the aforementioned problem, which in patrolling streets as a local political activist I observe to be steadily worsening to the consternation of many local residents."