born at 321.89 PPM CO2

"Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent effort." - John Ruskin

Thursday, 11 February 2021

READNG BOROUGH COUNCIL CUT BACKS

Isn't it about time councils were taken to task over their increasingly restrictive domestic waste collections?

Under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 - section 46, 4(a);

the council (4) In making requirements as respects receptacles under subsection (1) above, the authority may, by the notice under that subsection, make provision with respect to—

(a) the size, construction and maintenance of the receptacles;

In Reading, the council has taken its latest steps in reducing the bin sizes whilst Wokingham Borough Council is still living in 1970 utilising bag collections.

When Reading reduces the general waste bin again from 140 litres to 120 litres or smaller next year or the year after and Wokingham reduces the number of single use plastic bags it allows it's Council tax payers who will be there to stop them?

3 comments:

  1. Councils like Reading are using section 46 of the EPA 1990 to reduce their services to us; in this instance reducing the amount of rubbish they collect from households.

    Eventually we will find we've sleepwalked into paying for this service if we don't challenge them now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When the paid-to-fine litter enforcement operatives hand out Fixed Penalty Notices for the most trivial of actions; slipping an envelope into a litter bin, pouring the dregs of a coffee down a drain, or dropping a receipt that blew away, they’re not protecting the environment, they’re feeding a revenue stream.

    And the councils employing them know it. They know that the naïve or easily intimidated will just pay, while those with a bit of backbone and a working knowledge of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 will appeal and win because Section 33(4) of that very Act makes it clear that Parliament never intended this law to be used for petty or harmless acts.

    It explicitly states that the Secretary of State should “exclude deposits which are small enough or of such a temporary nature” from prosecution. Section 33 was written to stop illegal dumping, not legal daylight robbery dressed up as enforcement. It’s not “protecting the planet” it’s monetising mistakes.


    ReplyDelete
  3. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9307rnwzp4o

    ReplyDelete