Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of MRW, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Real cost of waste collection fund

The race is on for councils wishing to bid for a slice of the much vaunted Weekly Collection Support Scheme.

But with just two weeks to express an interest, legal experts, the industry and the Local Government Association have warned that the time scale and contractual complexities could thwart communities secretary Eric Pickles’ crusade against ‘fortnightly collections’.

In most circumstances, returning to weekly residual collections, as favoured by Pickles, would likely damage recycling rates and have additional environmental costs such as increased fleet emissions. There are also significant costs to the public purse. Service variation may well trigger the need to re-tender - and penalty clauses for breaking existing contracts.

These factors raise serious questions: given that councils face penalty costs of up to a year’s contract value, there is a risk that a significant chuck of the fund could be spent on legal and administrative complexities rather than on supporting recycling.

By contrast, focusing on introducing weekly food waste collections offers only an upside. It would help to reduce waste to landfill without carrying any of the costs of changing existing contracts, and offer a valuable boost to anaerobic digestion, which benefits the environment.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.