| Britain's No.1 quality newspaper website | Make us your homepage

Monday 1 December 2008

Recycling taxes - what a load of rubbish

By Philip Johnston

Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 19/03/2007

Have your say Read comments

The law of unintended consequences should be a required area of study for any new civil servant or fledgling politician. Often the most well-intentioned legislation can have perverse outcomes.

A few years ago, for instance, the Home Office introduced mandatory drug testing of prisoners. The result of a positive test meant an offender would be placed on a governor's report, an adjudication board held and, if found guilty, he could be liable for a range of punishments.

But this did not stop prisoners taking drugs; it merely encouraged many to switch from cannabis - which stays in the blood for weeks - to heroin, which leaves the bloodstream more rapidly. So more prisoners became hooked on heroin, which meant they committed more crimes when they left jail, which meant they went back to jail - you get the picture.

Or take the Government's target stating that nobody attending an A&E clinic should wait longer than four hours, a requirement backed by financial penalties for those that miss it. Soon after it was introduced, there was strong anecdotal evidence, later confirmed by official statistics, that hospitals were admitting people who could not be seen within the four hours simply to clear their lists.

But once they were on a ward, they were vulnerable to superbugs like MRSA and risked ending up in a worse condition than when they arrived at the hospital. There were also stories of patients being kept on board ambulances until the A&E staff were sure they could get them through within the four-hour limit, thereby tying up an emergency vehicle and, who knows, condemning a heart attack victim to death.

Yet these perverse outcomes have not stopped the Government continuing to set similar targets across the public sector. Nor do ministers appear to have grasped the fact that if you penalise people, then self-interest will kick in and they will do things that were never foreseen.

So it is with collecting rubbish and dealing with waste. The Government wants us to recycle more of our refuse, so what does it do? It encourages local councils to end once-a-week bin collections because, the argument goes, people will be so appalled by the prospect of overflowing garbage that they will ensure recyclable goods are properly sorted in order to reduce the volume and ensure it can be contained in a bin.

But for some people, especially those with large families or living in flats, this is nigh-on impossible. If they do not have their refuse collected every week, it will build up and become noisome and attract vermin, whatever the conclusions of last week's Whitehall-funded report that this did not pose a health hazard. Even people who observe good "bin hygiene" and wrap their left-over food properly in newspaper (isn't that meant to be recycled?) will find they have too much garbage. So what will they do then? What are they doing now?

A report published today by the Countryside Alliance suggests that some people are simply driving it to the nearest field and dumping it. Looking around our neighbourhood, they do not even bother going as far as a field. The amount of fly-tipping is reaching alarming proportions.

Some people think nothing of leaving unwanted furniture, defunct TVs or outdated computer screens by the side of the road in the selfish expectation that someone else will clear up after them. It is appalling behaviour; but it is how some people will react if they have no alternative or if other options are expensive or punitive. They will feel justified if they think they have already paid for a service that they are now going to lose.

It is bad enough with the ending of weekly dustbin collections. Imagine how much worse it could become if the Government slaps a rubbish tax on households as well. There have been deliberations in Whitehall for some months over the introduction of penalties on people who dispose of too much rubbish - a sort of "pay as you throw tax" charged according to the weight of garbage.

An inquiry chaired by Sir Michael Lyons, which has been looking at new ways of raising money for councils, has considered the idea; and although Gordon Brown may shy away from a national litter tax in his Budget on Wednesday, he might signal support for the idea should councils chose to introduce one.

Under one model the tax would be levied at between 25p and 50p a kilo, or around £10 a month for the "average" family. Can you imagine the bureaucracy and snooping that would be involved in administering such a scheme?

Furthermore, we already pay through council taxes for our rubbish to be cleared.

Indeed, for some households who do not have children and use few services, that is the principal function of their local authority, so it would be a bit rich if they had to pay again, especially when the collections are being halved. A household bin tax would also miss the real culprits - the producers and food stores who wrap their goods in ridiculous amounts of packaging. I have often been tempted, while going round a supermarket, to unwrap the food and leave all those silly little trays and mountains of plastic at the check-out and let them deal with it.

And, of course, there is the law of unintended consequences. By imposing new taxes in order to improve recycling, the Government will merely make it more difficult to achieve another target - that of reducing fly-tipping. You just know that a section of the population will find ways to avoid the charge, even if it means dumping their rubbish in a neighbour's bin if they can get away with it.

Surely, if councils really want to reduce rubbish and improve recycling, they should be rewarding us through tax rebates and not levying yet another charge on top of the one we already pay.

Taxes and penalties invariably fail to deliver what the politicians imagine they will, whereas more of us respond positively to an incentive. It is about time that politicians, instead of always reaching for the fiscal stick, recognised the greater potential of the carrot (unwrapped, of course).

Have your say

Fly-tipping 'will be made worse by bin taxes'

Comments

Privatized the garbage collection here in California.
Garbage bin collected every week.
Recycle bin colleted every week, all reycleables in one bin.
Yardwaste (tree trimmings, etc) collected every week, composted by the collector & sold.
Closing in on target of 70% total recycling.
Three bin sizes & prices available for each.
Cost way less than what you are already paying in UK!

Could the difference be something to do with the first word in this posting?

Posted by Al Hamilton on March 19, 2007 5:56 PM
Report this comment

This government always turns to the stick before the carrot. If some behaviour must be controlled, they make a punitive charge for the inappropriate action rather than a financial credit for the appropriate one. An extra charge for full wheelie bins when we already pay through the nose for council services, a charge per mile for the right to drive on roads, when we already pay a flat fee to have our car on the road and pay a charge for every litre of petrol we use. To have an operation when we need it we have to resort to private medical care when we already pay a substantial levy on our wages to pay for the NHS.
No wonder people seek ways to circumvent many of these extra charges.
Posted by Dave on March 19, 2007 5:56 PM
Report this comment

I'm one of those council "types" that is trying to make things happen the way people tell us they want it. No ulteria motives just trying to make the world a better place.

I'm pleased to note that many of your contributors like the idea of being able to recycle more but appear to be frustrated by the means that the government and councils are said to be using to achieve it....some of which appears to be alarmist at best.

I agree there needs to be joined up thinking at government level. From where I am it feels like we've been set up to fail. Would government get support to apply real pressure to reduce the volume of packaging that subsequently has to be disposed of at public expense? At best there should be a sustained 2 prong attact on waste. But instead the appear to have passed the problem to folk like me to sort out with one hand tied behind my back. I believe people can be trusted to do the right thing and contributors to this forum demonstrate that. So why create a 'penalty culture' which serves to derail a good business approach and our ability to work with the people to achieve something we all want.....which is less waste?

I can't comment on what happens elsewhere but we're planning a change of service which will mean that the all homes will have a collection every week.

Households will be able to recycle, card, plastic, fabric, glass, tins and paper and this will be collected one week on the same day as the green waste.

We'll provide an nice big wheeled bin (we don't provide anything now) which will take the equilvalent of 4 black bin bags to every home, that can take them, and empty it every other week.

So in effect we are still collecting people's waste every week. It is just that they'll have sorted it out first and in doing so satifying everybody's aim to be able to recycle more.

It is going to cost the council and its residents (through taxation) quite a bit more to achieve this but they told us they wanted to be able to recyle more and that they wanted a bettere service. This is the only viable way of doing it.

If you take all the material out of the traditional contents of your dustbin that can be easily recycled, on average we'd expect to find that more than half of what currently goes to the tip doesn't have to. Therefore, there is only half the amount of left over waste to be collected.

The question then is, do we carry on doing collections weekly for half the amount of waste and collect the recycleable stuff too? Some may say this is inefficient and expensive.

How many of us have missed the bin collection at some time in our lives? I suspect many if not all of us. Did the bin attract vermin, was there an awful smell....only you can answer that?

So in effect we are still collecting people's waste every week. It is just that they'll have sorted it out first thus satifying everybody's aim to be able to recycle more.

This applies to about 75 - 80% of households in my area. There are of course properties that cannot store material on site for 2 weeks such as flats and some terraces so here we'll have to carry on collecting every week....no problem. Large families may need more capacity to store too. So we'll look to provide that too and there will be other exceptions to but we can do that for the overall benefit of the community.

If nothing else if we continue to put the same volume of 'waste' into the ground that we are now the taxation it will attract will add several hundred thousand pounds each year the be collected from the people who aren't recycling as much as tey could. Sad but true....I know which option I'd prefer as a member of the community first and a tax payer second.
Posted by John on March 19, 2007 5:07 PM
Report this comment

We have to put our rubbish out in plastic sacks before we leave the house and they are collected by the council anything up to 4hrs later. What is to stop someone adding a heavy sack to 'my' pile, so that I end up being charged for the weight? I don't want to sit around all morning guarding a pile of refuse.
Posted by clifford rance on March 19, 2007 5:05 PM
Report this comment

Recycling taxes have nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with revenue generation. Thank goodness I chose to emigrate to a civilized country where the bins are emptied every night.

Posted by O Zangado on March 19, 2007 4:57 PM
Report this comment

Collect all plastic waste from superfluous packaging and dump in supermarket's plastic bag recyclers. problem solved.

Supermarkets will then lean on producers to reduce packaging.
Posted by A Burgess on March 19, 2007 4:28 PM
Report this comment

When I bought my house in Brittany 19 years ago, fly tipping was a problem in the area.

Now, about a mile from my house, there is a "decheterie" which is a supervised rubbish collection place where one takes one's rubbish, and puts it, according to what it is, into various specified skips: e.g.s plastics, paper and cardboard, metal, electrical goods, vegetation, glass etc. If one is in doubt, a rubbish expert is there to tell you where to put what. This "decheterie" is open three days a week.

One does not pay for this service and the place even manages to be self financing by selling the sorted rubbish to those who will recycle it.
In addition we have two rubbish collections from our house each week.

Fly tipping is no longer a problem - nor is disposing of an old fridge, oven or computer.

If Little Boy Green is serious about the environment he should be rather more imaginative than Blair and Brown and propose measures which offer incentives rather than penalties and taxes. But he won't will he, because, like Blair and Brown he is only interested in gesture politics.

Posted by Richard Tracey on March 19, 2007 4:26 PM
Report this comment

The people who cite what are doubtless very efficient methods of dealing with rubbish abroad, by buying pre-paid disposal bags, are missing a vital point. We already pay tax to have our rubbish removed, why should we pay again? If they were to remove the cost of rubbish removal from my Council Tax then I might be happy to buy bags from the local council, but I'm damned if I'm going to pay tax for rubbish removal and then pay for them to actually do the job as well.
Posted by Chris Lamb on March 19, 2007 4:15 PM
Report this comment

Please do let me know where can I recycle the 'NEW LOW CARBON FOOTPRINT' bulbs. They contain mercury!! So they can not be print in Land-Fill, My local council tells me to phone the Corporation of the London for info, who tell me they have no info contact my local authority, (who told be to phone the Corp of City of London?).
And so it goes round in an ever decreasing circle. Whats more the EU say they are going to faze out the older type of filament bulbs.
Please do let me know when a politicican will think their action through, to a meaning full conclusion.
Posted by John Bourne. on March 19, 2007 3:11 PM
Report this comment

Graham King, how quaint and innocent is your question: "how does a prison inmate gain access to drugs?". Why, from the prison warders of course! Duh!
Posted by Lost Innocence on March 19, 2007 2:45 PM
Report this comment

And then there are the mechanics of the whole thing which simply won't work.
Bins don't stay at one house, the bin men put them back anywhere. Your microchip will be halfway down the street in a few weeks. Assuming you paint your house number on your bin and retrieve it religiously after every collection, how do you stop other people putting their rubbish in your bin? They aren't lockable.

I bet if you find someone else has been dumping waste in your bin, trying to argue to the council that you are being overcharged for your rubbish will make trying get a refund for an incorrectly issued parking ticket look like a walk in the park.

And so the quality of life in the UK is diminished a little more every day.

It would make more sense to get rid of your bin altogether and dispose of the rubbish yourself some other way. I hope that we will at least have the right to opt out of this mad system and that reasonably priced independent Rubbish Disposal firms get set up to plug the gap, otherwise anyone who isn't very wealthy or vigilant as a hawk and with nothing else to do with their time except guard their bin, will have to resort to fly tipping.
Posted by Thalia on March 19, 2007 2:38 PM
Report this comment

Switching to a two weekly system has nothing to do with people dumping TVs in the countryside. These were never collected with the rubbish anyway. They are taken for free (at least in Oxfordshire where I'm from) at the local civic ammenity site. Dumping a TV in the countryside when you can dispose of it properly for free is just anti-social behaviour, not to mention stupid - a chap from Abingdon was just fined 800 quid for dumping rubbish when he could have taken it to the tip for free.

I don't agree with a charge for collecting household waste as there are plenty of authorities that achieve high levels of recycling without this being necessary. However, I think the idea would be that you'd get a council tax discount if you produced less waste rather than pay twice.
Posted by Dan on March 19, 2007 2:36 PM
Report this comment

Here in High Peak bagfulls of dog mess are flung about the countryside, hung in trees, dropped in reservoirs, etc.. law of unforseen consequencies or easily predictable result of neurotic legislation to "solve" a non-problem?
Posted by Pete on March 19, 2007 2:17 PM
Report this comment

I expect the town-hall accountants will already have a spreadsheet showing the planned income from fines for 'contaminating' the recycling wheelie-bins (£200 for a 1st offence).

It's all a monumental con, just chuck everything into a black bin, with all identifying papers shredded.
Posted by Colin Soames on March 19, 2007 1:54 PM
Report this comment

Here in Oxford City we have one of the highest council tax charges in the country and yet they cut our refuse collection to fortnightly in the name of "recycling". The latest is to fine anyone that has side-waste or their bags out on the wrong day, yet another tax earner for the council. Why do we allow ourselves to be dictated to? We have started an e petition to Tony Blair to ensure weekly collections for every household.
Posted by Eric Murray on March 19, 2007 1:34 PM
Report this comment

In Bath, we pay £25 a year for a green bin for recyling cardboard and garden waste. I have such a bin because the previous owner of our house payed this charge. When it comes up for renewal this summer, I will not pay, they will remove my bin and I'll put my cardboard in black bags to be taken away for free.
Posted by Tim on March 19, 2007 1:26 PM
Report this comment

Here in Bristol we have had fortnightly collections for a bit under a year already and a council that admits to a 40% increase in rat infestation. The councillor responsible actually attributed this increase to "climate change" and is adamant its nothing to do with refuse.

Reason will never wash with such people, otherwise these entirely irrational "recycling" schemes would never have been foisted upon us. Most of the supposedly "recycled" material is sent to land-fills in China. Don't take my word for it.That most "Green" of all papers, the Independent ran an expose of this farce a few weeks ago. Apparently the container ships that bring cheap Chinese imports to us are sent back full to the gunwales with our "recycled" rubbish.

Recycling will never "help the environment". It consumes energy and resources to do it. Meanwhile, there are vast areas of the UK apt for land-fill, but which we are not free to use as such because of various EU regulations and targets.

Recycling is simply a ritual adherence in the "Green" religion. As with all religious observances, it must cost the adherent some pain or expense. Thats its purpose. To demonstrate devotion. Therefore these Green council officials WANT us to be forced to suffer in implementing their rituals. They are indeed the Green Taleban.
Posted by Tom Dixon on March 19, 2007 1:14 PM
Report this comment

I know were my local councillor lives. He has a nice large front garden. I'm sure he wont mind. He shouldn't! I've already paid the council to remove my rubbish.
Posted by The Phantom Fly-tipper. on March 19, 2007 1:06 PM
Report this comment

I opposed the introduction of bin bags years ago, but my neighbours were apathetic. It didn't turn out as bad as I thought immediately, but we're on the way now with the current nonsense. I don't think they are a good idea for binmen either. Surely everywhere should adopt lidded trolley bins? All the authority threats over rubbish and recycling are idiotic anyway. We already know that some are backing up the fines for incorrect placing of waste (particularly for composting) and then disposing of it in landfill! Apparently as long as it was collected for recycling and not landfill it meets the EU definition and the council can then tip it in a landfill site, rather than recycling it. Plus the cost of clearing 'waste' through government bureaucracy is so great and expensive that it generally doesn't happen. It would seem fines are the new taxes.
Posted by EyeSee on March 19, 2007 12:54 PM
Report this comment

I've read the article and I've read the comments and no one has it mentioned the cause of the problem.
England cannot support a population of 50 million anymore than the world can support a population of 6 billion.
For Waste Disposal Problem, read Global Warming and Pollution, the reasons are just the same. There are too many of us on this planet!

Posted by j.b.windmill on March 19, 2007 12:50 PM
Report this comment

How will they apportion the charge between residents of a block of flats or subdivided house who put all their rubbish in the same bins?
Posted by H Shah on March 19, 2007 12:35 PM
Report this comment

Thank goodness you have enough room in your garden for a bonfire. Yes... Unfortunately, the (low) temperatures of your bonfire will be such that your burning waste will generate dioxins in such volumes that, if it was from a council incinerator, you would be campaigning for it to be closed down.
Which takes us back to Philip Johnston's theme of the law of unintended consequences.
Posted by Richard Majewicz on March 19, 2007 12:32 PM
Report this comment

My neighbour tips his smelly waste in an open public litter bin. Expect more of this behaviour if the government introduces pay as you throw.
Posted by Alex C on March 19, 2007 12:29 PM
Report this comment

Jennifer on March 19, 2007 9:23 AM

The reason we are up in arms is because we ALREADY PAY for our rubbish disposal, it is billed under our council tax, in my area alone it will cost the local tax payers £2,084,000 this year!

They have already reduced how often it is collected and fine individuals if we inadvertently put the 'wrong' plastic in the wrong bin NOTE: the 'wrong' type varies from area to area!

And what is now being proposed is to reduce the amount we can dispose of (so where does it go then?) and then tax us again!

That is why so many of us have lost the plot, perhaps you could elaborate now why you think the UK alternative is as good as yours?
Posted by J Bush on March 19, 2007 12:05 PM
Report this comment

--"The majority of businesses are charged a flat rate for rubbish disposal and so have no incentive to limit waste."

No incentive whatsoever in our case as the local council (Sevenoaks) has refused to issue us or collect from recycling bins whilst at the same time threatening to fine us if they again observe our green-motivated building officer taking our recyclables (not rubbish - recyclables!) to the local tip as it is "business waste".

Sigh.
Posted by Phil on March 19, 2007 12:02 PM
Report this comment

In other parts of Europe, separate payment for rubbish disposal, according to the amount of waste, is common and easy exceedingly easy to administer. It should be a win/win: if it reduces the amount of waste then council tax should fall by even more than the offset created by the waste disposal charge.
Posted by Bill Young on March 19, 2007 11:57 AM
Report this comment

I have opted out of addressed and "door-drop" junk mail, put up a notce saying "No free newspapers thankyou" and I recycle everything I possibly can.
However, the prospect of having my non-recyclable rubbish kicking about for a fortnight fills me with horror. In high summer, by the time collection day comes around, it will be positively festering. I won't be putting out any less rubbish, it will just be at a more advanced stage of decomposition by the time it is collected.
And if this is the case with my two-person, relatively tidy household, I shudder to think what will be the case for those who are not so hygienic in their ways, or who have large families.
Posted by Janie on March 19, 2007 11:51 AM
Report this comment

You never "paid for" rubbish collection from the council. They just came and took your money. You can speculate what they might do with it, but there's no binding contract. Turns out, they don't want to deliver the service you think you paid for - too bad. You're the one who's willing to tolerate the existence of public sector service monopolies. As long as you do, they'll continue to be run for anyone's benefit but yours. Privatize, or be damned.
Posted by Julian Morrison on March 19, 2007 11:46 AM
Report this comment

Am I missing the point about wrapping rubbish carefully in newspapers? It doesn't seem sensible to me buy them when you get all the news and comment you could possibly want online.

Perhaps the solution would be to hand out free newspapers at railway stations and supermarkets. They needn't have printing on them because that would just be a waste of ink.
Posted by Bob Doney on March 19, 2007 11:44 AM
Report this comment

Anyone with half a brain (which obviously excludes the socialist tax and wasters in Government) would of course realise the consequences of this;

Increase in fly tipping
Increase in back garden bonfires, burning who knows what, emitting all sorts of pollutants (cyanides, particulates, metals, sulphur and nitrogen oxides)
Increase in anti-social activity
Increase in vermin (rodents I mean)

Of course it gives them an excuse to hire more people onto the payroll (yet more taxes!), and of course (in the true spirit of socialism) means more pettifogging bureaucrats can stick their noses into your affairs, and any sign of wanting to better yourself can be taxed into oblivion.

All this of course will be used as an excuse to increase taxes even more, in addition to the revaluation scheme which will bleed you dry regardless of ability to pay (hello Gordon, not everyone living in Kent is a mutli-millionaire stockbroker, some of us get by on a pittance) or indeed if you own a home (landlords sure as h*ll ain’t going to pay my council tax).

Mind you I’m not surprised by the ever growing rapaciousness of this Government, as for every £100 “Grabber Broon” has stolen, only £30 has actually found its way to the frontline (thus barely covering inflation!)!

No to Socialism, vote Conservative!

Posted by Malcolm on March 19, 2007 11:38 AM
Report this comment

In the suburb of Paris that I live we have bin collections 3 times a week, recycling collections once a week and large object collections once a month. Not surprisingly we have no problem with fly-tipping, or indeed, litter in general. Before dismissing this as a typically French high cost solution the fact is that for each collection fewer bins are put out (if there is only one collection every 2 weeks then everyone is going to put out their bin even if it's only half full) and thus the bin lorries get around the town extremely quickly, efficiently and with almost no disruption to traffic.
Posted by FC on March 19, 2007 11:29 AM
Report this comment

What business is it of national government to dictate the frequency of rubbish collections by local councils ? Isn't this just another example of Whitehall centrist dictats ?
Posted by Jon Cass on March 19, 2007 11:14 AM
Report this comment

UKIP can change the political landscape,let's give it a chance next voting day.
Posted by A.N.Other on March 19, 2007 11:12 AM
Report this comment

Most people will do what they can so as not to be conned - make no mistake, what is happening with "Waste" and "Green Issues" is a con being enacted by the labour party. I have just bought 120 proper light bulbs so that when they are "banned" I'll have enough to see me through, and I have just cleared part of the garden so that I can burn most of my rubbish (especially the plastic) If the government (spit, spit) realy were interested in the environment they'd go after the buinesses creating the waste instead of just taxing and penalising the consumer and electorate.
Posted by A soon to be Expat on March 19, 2007 11:11 AM
Report this comment

We are a hairs breadth away from our ever growing Council Tax demands being re-named property tax. Then all the current services included in the tax will become purchasable additions.
Children attending local authority schools £? Rubbish collection and street cleaning £? Local Social Services £? Library £? Police £?
The reason Chief Executives of Local Authorities commanding salaries in excess of the Prime Minister, and like him usually devoid of any business acumen. Couple to this numerous politically motivated wannabe M.P's serving as Local Councillors and the result is high spending chaos, with little in the way of service to the community who pay for the debacle that is local government today.

Posted by D Haslam on March 19, 2007 11:10 AM
Report this comment

"There have been deliberations in Whitehall for some months over the introduction of penalties on people who dispose of too much rubbish - a sort of "pay as you throw tax" charged according to the weight of garbage."

There is another sinmister side to this;

What will happen if, for whatever reason, a person is noticed not to be putting any rubbish out, or the council estimate that they are not putting "enough" out?

Are we going to see "rubbish spies" prosecuting people for suspected fly tipping?

Following the "logic" that if you are not putting it in your bin, you must be getting rid of it illegaly.

Posted by Ragnar Vagmornasson von Brandenburg-Preußen on March 19, 2007 10:57 AM
Report this comment

It's all stick and precious little carrot with this miserable, incompetent, pernicious government.

Since my road tax is shortly set to double, in a move that will have zero impact on the buying decisions of the vast majority of "gas guzzler" purchases, but quite significantly hurt those like myself who buy more affordable performance cars, I fully intend to change my behaviour.

As one who carefully recycled glass, cardboard, paper etc, I will now refrain from any recycling whatsoever, especially since doing so occasionally involves transporting recyclable materials by car.

The only "green" measures I will henceforth take any interest in are those that will save me money. I will also take any steps necessary to avoid paying "rubbish taxes".

Posted by Neil on March 19, 2007 10:55 AM
Report this comment

Thank goodness I've enough room in my garden for a bonfire!
Posted by Brian E on March 19, 2007 10:16 AM
Report this comment

What can be recycled varies so much from area to area that the system has become farcical as a nationwide policy. A further fault is that so much plastic has no category printed on it- therefore in many areas what might be recyclable has to be put into landfill rubbish bins to avoid mistakes or even a fine. The trading standards officials should not permit any packaging which is not labelled. The labelling must be much clearer; it is almost impossible to easily read about 90% of the traingle marks.Considerable problems arise over specialist metal waste - brass copper, zinc etc and batteries, which have to be taken to recycling centres. The trip to get rid of specialist waste may produce more pollution than saving it merits. In waste disposal as in everything else there is not such thing as a free lunch. Whatever we do produces some form of energy expenditure and possibly pollutin - even being green.
Posted by F.Cunctator on March 19, 2007 10:14 AM
Report this comment

It works
Tax by the weight of rubbish in our bins works!! Sweden has a perfect system for this.
Posted by Peter Darlington on March 19, 2007 10:13 AM
Report this comment

Another way of getting rid of non-smelly, not too heavy waste is to take it to the office and throw it in the bin. The majority of businesses are charged a flat rate for rubbish disposal and so have no incentive to limit waste. I have been eating my breakfast and opening my personal mail at my desk prior to starting work for years and so all such waste ends up in my office bin anyway.

Posted by Sally on March 19, 2007 10:09 AM
Report this comment

I would love to recycle more but the nearest recycling bins are a 30 minute drive away & as I don't drive that becomes one heck of a walk (specially with a toddler in tow). The govt has obviously not considered those of us that have no transport & my public transport consists of a once weekly service.
I have nowhere to store my full binbags till collection day as living in a rural village means any bags left outside are battered by multitudes of foxes & pets. I cannot store 2 weeks worth of rubbish in my home, it's unhealthy, it's bad enough I have to store a weeks worth in my kitchen as it is.
Posted by Amanda Regan on March 19, 2007 10:05 AM
Report this comment

Isn't this a case of the tail wagging the dog? These so-called "public servants" are not going to change until we take action. Don't you think it is time to remind them who pays their overblown salaries and seriously overblown pensions? Isn't it time to start forming Citizens Protection Associations to take the fight back to the enemy - because that is what they have become.
Posted by David, Oxford on March 19, 2007 9:37 AM
Report this comment

Being a complete neighbour from hell, I'm going to:
* fill up my neighbours' bins, rather than my own
* burn stuff, unleashing all sorts of horrible and possibly poisonous fumes into my neighbourhood
* stop my postman everyday, and aggressively decide which items of post I choose to accept.

Fortunately, I'm the only nasty bloke in my neighbourhood, and the effect of this proposal shouldn't be too great. However, imagine what will happen to quality of life in places where there's already friction and antisocial behaviour. Unintended consequences.

Councils have been allowed to think they rule us, rather than serve us. It has led them to believe they're entitled to our money, rather than think they should provide a service. Half the rubbish collections? Has any of them thought of halving the amount of diversity awareness outreach they do?
Posted by Andrew Forbes on March 19, 2007 9:27 AM
Report this comment

In relation to drug testing in prisons instigated by Michael Howard when Home Secretary. One point was missed. Many Prison Governors paid non drug using prisoners to undertake tests, safe in the knowledge that they would show a negative result. This in turn improved the prisons position in the league tables for combating drug misuse. Job done!

Posted by S Shack on March 19, 2007 9:25 AM
Report this comment

I live in north-eastern Switzerland. Why are you all up in arms about paying for your rubbish disposal? I have to buy marked plastic sacks for 35, 60 or 110 litres of rubbish at my local supermarket at a price covering the disposal cost. They are collected weekly. Old newspapers are collected by local clubs throughout the year. This is free. We take our bottles and tins to the local collection point whenever necessary. Twice a year we have a free old metal collection. In the summer we have free collections of garden rubbish. The cost comes out of our taxes. As we live in a house with garden we compost a lot and have a shredder for prunings etc. We take electrical goods back to any electrical shop and they will recycle them. There is now a charge for this which is included in the price of any new electrical equipment you buy.

Posted by Jennifer on March 19, 2007 9:23 AM
Report this comment

In my street one family already adopts the strategy of filling up the neighbours bins when they are put out on collection day. To enforce the pay-as-you-throw tax we would need lockable bins.
Posted by Jon Reed on March 19, 2007 9:22 AM
Report this comment

Living as I do in a village in a rural area, with little or no benefit from local government services or public transport my rates have just increased by 5.9%.
My local authority supplies me with a large green recycling bin which is emptied every two weeks by an outsourced private contractor weather conditions permitting.
Basically however I am limited by what I am allowed to recycle, this being limited to tin cans, aluminium cans, newspapers and magazines and unshreaded paper, old telephone books (One a year)and certain plastic articles. Plastic yogurt pots excluded. All containers have to be washed clean usually with hot water to be acceptable? Hence I suppect that in truth more energy is being wasted than is recovered.
A trip to my local Council Recycling Centre (Return journey of 15 miles) takes on nightmare proportions and I am sure causes many people not to bother.
Recently I arrived with two large cardboard boxes containing assorted old paint containers, some plastic some metal. On asking where I should put them, I was asked if they were empty. I replied that all had some remaining paint in them. I was then informed. "Take them home and empty them, then wash then containers out and come back, the plastic containers to be placed in the plastics bin, the metal containers to be put in the metals bin, the cardboard boxes could be put into the cardboard bin."
On asking where exactly I should empty the old paint as it could not be emptied down drains and was harmful if emptied on the land the operative just shrugged his shoulders. He then replied."Just put them in a black sack and put them in with your non recyclable rubbish." (Wasted journey and wasted fuel.)
Whilst I was there a man arrived with a hire van containing his old kitchen units. He was informed that he could only deposit half the units that week and bring the rest back the following week. This was due to quantity restrictions placed on individuals? He was also informed as he had arrived in a white van (hired) he was lucky they were allowing him to leave anything? He left like me totally frustrated and I suspect had a large bonfire that night.
I have been reliably informed that it cost the local
Councils £6 in subsidies for every £1 of materials recycled.
Further more there is little continuity between Councils as to what can be placed in recyling bins.
This will enable them in the future to levy fixed penalty fines for confused people who mistakenly break the rules.
Nice little earner on top of ever increasing Council Tax?

Posted by D Haslam on March 19, 2007 9:19 AM
Report this comment

There was some sort of hiatus some years ago with our bin collections.
As this is the only service that I receive for council tax. I neatly piled my rubbish, well wrapped, on the town hall steps and encouraged others to do the same, I had quite a mound before I was done.
Jolly fun, and amazing how quickly it was collected from there!!!
Have the courage of your convictions and strip the packaging off the products in the supermarkets they will soon get the message.
Better yet, go to a street market.

Posted by Christina Osborne on March 19, 2007 9:09 AM
Report this comment

I agree with most of this article. However, surely the thought of councils rewarding us with tax rebates will involve cumbersome, expensive bureaucracy. Just look at the shambles of the tax credit system or the CSA.

If government were really interested in the environment they would be looking at reducing the UK population, not finding exciting new ways to raise revenue for to squander.
Posted by John MacKinnon on March 19, 2007 9:08 AM
Report this comment

Well said, but it will take a lot of common sense to initiate a 'carrot' system. Lacking in most cases, and the 'carrot' would be wrapped in cliches and hedged around with fences, so rendering it useless. Control freaks don't recognise freedom of choice or any other freedom.
Posted by Simon Henderson on March 19, 2007 8:49 AM
Report this comment

People will be flushing their food wastes down the toilet -- this will be a total disaster for the water utilities (and the environment).
Posted by Imli on March 19, 2007 8:23 AM
Report this comment

I used to be an avid, obsessively proud, recycler through the issue of large clear bags from Gosport Borough Council as I have nowhere to put a wheelie bin. Then the bag supply ended and I was told I would only get 26 a year. I have ran out, have been told I will get no more of these bags, and to be honest now recycle bottles only. My exasperation at their petty false economy (saving a few pence by not supplying bags) has therefore resulted in the perverse effect of complete demoralisation. I cannot be alone.
Posted by Charles Allsopp on March 19, 2007 8:20 AM
Report this comment

The local councils should have efficiency targets for their part in the recycling - if they don't meet them, then the percentage by which they fail should be reduced from the rubbish collection portion of our council tax. Why should we have to pay for their inefficiency!
Posted by c.walmsley on March 19, 2007 8:19 AM
Report this comment

Here's a way of reducing the paper rubbish we get - post junkmail back in the prepaid envelopes you get; those that are addressed to "the occupant" put back in the postbox - it will reduce weight AND the postman will keep his job!
Posted by c.walmsley on March 19, 2007 8:16 AM
Report this comment

Try this one folks,

To effectively dispose of the non-adressed rubbish delivered by the Postal Service just take it to your nearest pillar box and give it back to them. If enough of us do it it will soon stop them delivering and if it doesn't we will not have to worry about as it will be their problem.
Posted by The Wrinkly Rebel on March 19, 2007 8:12 AM
Report this comment

When you fail to tackle advancing issues in good
time and good order, the number of 'targets' can
end up on your doorstep very quickly.

At this point the solution seems to be to move
from rifle to shotgun to dropping a hand grenade
at your feet, and hoping that it doesn't wipe out
more who are 'innocent' in the hope of being
seen to deal with the 'guilty'.

Nice vest. Is it Semtex?
Posted by Peter Martin on March 19, 2007 8:10 AM
Report this comment

An excellent article - summarised as political headlines negated by practice on the streets. I do worry about ANY new taxes leading to higher net payments for households, but there are plenty of recycling models to look at. In Brussels, household waste can only be collected if it is contained in sealed official municipal waste bags [cost 0.5 Euro, from memory]...a low cost system to manage and it gives consumers the right signals.
Posted by Neil Marshall on March 19, 2007 8:09 AM
Report this comment

I cannot see the need for household collection of rubbish.

I am currently living in Nice and have visited various other parts of southern France. Here in Nice, there are no door to door collections. Instead, large wheelbins are strategically placed in 'garages' around the city. You take your rubbish to the bins and they are emptied daily.

In the country these bins are placed by the roadside or in carparks and the same process takes place.

This means you do not have rubbish lying around for a week or so, there is not the unsightly sight of rubbish lining the streets waiting for collection and collection itself is actually cheaper.

So when Boris refers to the issue of rubbish building up and causing vermin, I wonder why Oxfordshire Council can't go the France route?

Adrian
Posted by Adrian Denning on March 19, 2007 8:09 AM
Report this comment

By what feat of the imagination does this bunch of cretins that call themselves government think that they are capable of introducing the necessary systems to monitor what we are throwing away in our rubbish? Their incompetence in the area of IT systems is legendary, as nothing they have yet devised is anywhere near working properly. To me this is the major reason that road pricing will never come about, simply that the weak minded idiots could never make it work and certainly not at a cost that would make it financially viable.
Whilst I am a staunch supporter of "Care in the Community", I draw the line at allowing them to sit in Parliament and pronounce on things that they have no real understanding of. If this is living then roll on Death !!
Posted by Jim on March 19, 2007 8:07 AM
Report this comment

In Switzerland rubbish is only collected in official rubbish bags,issued by the local community, these cost the equivalent of £1 each and the income is then used to reduce the level of local taxation. This encourages recycling because people save money by it. Fly dumping does happen occasionally, usually by newcomers who, when spotted by their neighbours, are visited by the local police and advised not to continue with the practice.

The local supermarkets package their goods just like the UK but supply areas where people can open and discard as much of that packaging as they wish before leaving, free of charge.There are two local collections every week, one for household rubbish and one for green waste. The latter being composted and returned to the local community free for collection.

The key word in all of this is Local; it's local policies made by local politicians, usually after local referenda reflecting the will and desires of the local populace. They own it and its' consequences. It therefore get active local support, polite but strict enforcement and works.

The Swiss have long understood that "local" works. Hopefully some time soon the UK will get back to the local decision making of the local government of the 1950s and 60s when local worked there too. It's time to put local back into communities in the UK by leaving them to solve their own problems instead of directives from on high be it Quango, Supra-urban, Regional, National Government or EU.
Posted by Neil Jones on March 19, 2007 8:07 AM
Report this comment

You've missed the point. They want extra income UNDER THE GUISE of environmental improvements. Penalties produce extra income whilst discounts produce lower income. Its a no-brainer: choose penalties.
Posted by R Mason on March 19, 2007 8:03 AM
Report this comment

Back in the 70s I spent some time in Oregon. There there was a mandatory deposit fee charged on every beer can. It was only a few cents but it was enough to encourage children to scour the hedgerows looking for beer cans that they could redeem at the liquor stores and thereby earn some pocket money. I seem to remember we had something similar here once: 2p on old bleach bottles and other such containers. Could not some similar scheme be reintroduced? What about a returnable deposit on supermarket packaging? Or is that too complicated for our pea-brained politicians to organise?
Posted by Adrian Gilbert on March 19, 2007 8:01 AM
Report this comment

Many of us already have fortnightly collections. In my area it generally works OK, but woebetide you if you accidentally miss a collection - especially in summer. The rotting, stinking, maggot-infested wheelie bin is then best left as far away from your house as it can go.
Posted by Paul Holden on March 19, 2007 7:56 AM
Report this comment

Ensure that every purchase has a deposit levied on the rubbish attributable, repayable to to the purshaser at point of delivery with proof of purcahse. Some company's will gain others lose in the short term but everyone wil gain in the long term as retailers try to reduce loss margins by reducing rubbish. As this takes effect increase a mandated deposit so as to encourage return. Insist that every producer packs produce in recyclable containers and collects same on return.
Posted by save me from rubbish on March 19, 2007 7:49 AM
Report this comment

I live in rural west sussex and chichester District Council introduced the two weekly two bin system a couple of years ago. The bins have to be so large that after two weeks they become heavy. The elderly, infirm or plain lazy leave them outside their houses all the time to save the effort of pulling them in and out each week. The result is that our lovely country villages are blighted by such huge coloured bins along the streets. Is this environmentally friendly?
Posted by Gwilym Ashworth on March 19, 2007 7:46 AM
Report this comment

If only more people recycled out of choice, there would be less of a need for measures such as reducing collection frequency or "pay as you throw". Unfortunately, there is an element that will only recycle if compelled to do so by factors such lack of bin capacity. I even know people that use their recycling boxes for storing full bottles, and throw the empties in the bin! It's partly because of these attitudes that more forceful measures are being imposed on us.
Posted by Daniel Wales on March 19, 2007 7:29 AM
Report this comment

You have totally missed the point; real jobs are evaporating like the snow in summer, so you need more non-jobs on the public payroll. By creating a rubbish tax and an unachievable recycling regime the Government will, at a stroke, create a vast number of jobs. When you add this to the number of Council Tax enforcers (snoopers) needed to administer the new Council Tax system you will find that the unemployment problem is solved for generations. Only one problem remains, how to pay for it all!

My Council Tax in the UK for a small flat is £1000, my Council Tax in France for a large house and an orchard is £370 – QED.

Posted by Ex-Pat, France on March 19, 2007 7:27 AM
Report this comment

Your point is generally well made, although I'm not so sure about the start of your piece.
Surely, the issue of drugs in prisons is not which form of muck these miscreants pump into their bodies, but how on earth, in a highly regulated environment like a prison, does an inmate gain access to drugs? I've posed this question before, but the comment was not displayed - am I missing something?
The more startling 'Law of Unintended Consequences' is that criminals, motivated by drug addiction, can be banged away for x years and still obtain their 'requirements' during Her Majesty's pleasure. How bizarre is that? And what an appalling reflection upon the standards of administration, methods of control and quality of staff employed in the prison service. It is an ostentatious scandal, which everyone seems to treat with Nelson's eye. WHY?
Posted by Graham King on March 19, 2007 6:50 AM
Report this comment

Brilliant article. Clearly setting out the totally illogical lack of 'joined up thinking' from this control freak power crazed incompetent government.

Boy Dave should take note of the way the population see life in the REAL world.
Posted by J Bush on March 19, 2007 6:42 AM
Report this comment

I remember a Dutch friend commenting many years ago that when their government introduced a tax based on the weight of rubbish disposed of, what happened was that everyone was going out at night to fill up a neighbours bin with their rubbish. The outcome of this is so predictable, surely even the government can forsee it.
Posted by David Hulse on March 19, 2007 6:09 AM
Report this comment

I wondered what was meant 'by hygenic wrapping' and this article explains wrapping in newspaper. I don't think this will be enough to stop the smell of rotting food which will result in attracting flies and vermin - yuk. I rather think they were refering to 'hygenic wrapping' to mean wrapped in plastic - yet more waste!
In my county of Rutland they do not collect re-cyclable rubbish, the householder has to take it to the recycle bins at the tip or the supermarket. It is made very difficult for me to go the tip as I don't have a car and even on occasions when I rent one I still cannot go. This is because you have to have a permit to go to the tip that is issued once a year and has to have your car registration number printed on it. The reason for this? to stop out of county people using the Rutland tips, the council claims it costs an extra 35k to deal with their rubbish. Surely it makes more sense for people to go to their nearest tip.
The whole rubbish collection system is really in a mess that needs to be sorted out nationally. I think a weekly pick-up is essential.
Posted by Judith on March 19, 2007 3:57 AM
Report this comment

What's scary is that it should need an editorial piece to highlight what should be completely self evident to politicians!

It is an annoying piece of business jargon but it is accurate - what's missing today is "joined up thinking"
Posted by Ian Jones on March 19, 2007 1:24 AM
Report this comment

It's petty little rules in the recycling regimes that now infest our town halls that turn public servants into hitleresque petty dictators - just itching to make an example of the first person they catch whose bin is a bit too full. Not only is the Global Warming excuse for this tyrannical regime looking more and more like a badly flawed theory - the recycling methods they use can be shown to be even worse environmentally than simply putting the rubbish into landfill. Why can't they just do what we pay them to do? Empty the bins!
Posted by Cllr. Chris Cooke on March 19, 2007 1:24 AM
Report this comment

What has to be demolished is the ridiculous idea we "generate" rubbish,we don't we have it thrust upon us.Every day more unwanted mail come through our letterboxes,the Royal Mail wishes to inundate us with more.Every transaction has its little pile of printed receipts,official correspondence always seems to run to several pages,and explanatory booklet and leaflets.
Stop waste,stop pushing paper.
Posted by Peter B on March 19, 2007 1:21 AM
Report this comment

We have little narrow minded people trying to run the country. They are totally out of their depth... if only they would drown !!!

UKIP has just launched a manifesto of a variety of issues based around proper efficient usage of the money being wasted by the unelected, fraud riddled EU. As the true evil of the EU reveals itself so UKIP now has members from the traditional parties, with both ex-labour and ex-tory party members standing for the National Executive.

UKIP, the country's fourth largest (and growing) political party , is now the ONLY party standing for less government interference and reduced taxes.
Posted by Adrian Jones on March 19, 2007 1:21 AM
Report this comment

Dt Opinion