1. Recommendations / Decision Requested

ITEM NO. P01

Subject: Introduction of Charges for Bulky Waste Collections

Report of: Service Director Operational Services Email: [email protected] Tel: 01706 922005 Cabinet Member: Councillor Martin Burke

1. RECOMMENDATIONS / DECISION REQUESTED

1.1. Members are requested to approve the Introduction of Charges for Bulky Waste Collections as detailed in Paragraph 4.6 of this report..

2. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1. To assist Members to make an informed decision in relation to any financial savings that may need to be made as a result of the targets set for Environmental Management.

2.2 Environmental Management has a significant budget which is predominantly focussed on delivering front line services to residents of the borough. As a result of the economic situation, there is requirement to consider whether the Council can continue to deliver these types of services in the same way.

2.3 Prior to phase 3 proposals Environmental Management's annual spend on bulky collections was approx £220,000. The implementation of the previous proposal (BPEM2) to change current week day service to weekend service will make savings of approx £38,500. A return to a chargeable service for all bulky items will achieve further savings of £37,000

3. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED

3.1. In order to achieve the significant financial challenges the Council is facing it is appropriate for Members to consider all options to review services.

4. BACKGROUND & SUMMARY

4.1 In 2004 Members agreed to the introduction of a charge for the removal of bulky items. The introduction of charges significantly reduced the number of requests being made.

4.2 During the budget setting for 2008/09 Members decided to reintroduce the free collections and as a result the number of bulky collection requests greatly increased resulting in a significant additional cost to the service.

4.3 Although the authority has a statutory obligation to either provide, or arrange for the collection of bulky items, it can make a charge should it wish to do so. 4.4 Rochdale along with Manchester and Oldham are the only authorities within AGMA who offer a free bulky refuse service. Manchester have however recently amended and restricted the scope of their free service where tenants/residents now only receive 2 free collections per year with a maximum of 3 items per visit. Any additional collections or items are now subject to a charge.

4.5 The remaining AGMA authorities who charge have all (except Tameside) recently increased their charges for the collection of bulky items to the following levels:-

 Bolton up to 5 items £26.00 (additional 5 items £26.00)  Bury up to 3 items £15.00 (additional items £5.00 per item)  Salford up to 4 items £24.14 (more than 4 items visit/quote)  Stockport 1 item £18.36 (2 items £36.59,3-8 items £55.34)  Tameside up to 5 items £23.00  Trafford up to 5 items £25.00 (minimum charge)

4.6 Currently in Rochdale up to 5 household items such as beds, mattresses, carpets, chairs, suites etc are collected free of charge. It is proposed that the following charge for the collection of items such as these is now made.

 £18.00 for up to 3 items + £5.00 for every additional item above 3.

4.7 The Council Website and Contact Centre will give details of all charges and will also signpost alternative ways that items can be disposed of free of charge, either by taking waste to a Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC), or by using reuse sites such as “Freecycle” or “Freeuse”.

4.8 It is anticipated that this proposal could generate through its introduction income in the region of £37,000 and will bring us in line with the majority of authorities within AGMA currently charging for this service.

5. CONSULTATION UNDERTAKEN / REQUIRED

5.1. With the Portfolio Holder. With public Forum Groups.

1. SUMMARY / ASSESSMENT OF STAFF CONSULTATION

6.1 Staff via SCG Meetings held on 30th September; 19th October; 3rd November; 16th November; 1st December; 14th December.

6.2 No issues raised either for or against this proposal

2. SUMMARY / ASSESSMENT OF NON STAFF CONSULTATION

7.1 General public via RMBC Consultation Hub, plus  Township Meeting.(open forum) : w/c 7 November -10th November 2011  Middleton Environment Forum 16th November 2011  Smallbridge & Firgrove – 1st December 2011.  Balderstone and Kirkholt Area Forum -Tuesday 13 December 2011  Central Rochdale Area Forum - Thursday 8 December 2011  Sparth Area Forum - Wednesday 7 December 2011.

7.2 Summary of comments received;

 Completely agree with the proposal, cannot understand why bulky collection charges were withdrawn in the first place.  Only concern is the threat of flytipping, but I imagine there is initiatives/strategies to counteract this.  Rubbish will be fly tipped all over the borough, people cannot afford to pay £18 for removal, I thought this was why the charge was dropped some time ago.  Kerbside collections of bulky rubbish reintroduced at intervals of 3-4 months.  A good idea.

7.3 All questions and consultation responses have been noted and taken into account when submitting the proposals.

3. EQUALITY / COMMUNITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.1 There are no (significant)equality community issues arising from this report.(See EIA)

4. WORKFORCE EQUALITY IMPACTS ASSESSMENT

9.1 There are no (significant) workforce equality issues arising from this report

5. VOLUNTARY SECTOR IMPACTS

10.1 There are no (significant) impacts arising form this report

6. DETAIL OF AMENDMENTS OR CHANGES MADE TO THE ORIGINAL PROPOSALS AS A RESULT OF CONSULTATION

11.1 There are no amendments or changes following staff consultation

11.2 There are no amendments or changes following non –staffing consultation

7. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

12.1 If a paid bulky waste service were to be re-introduced it is proposed that a charge of £18 per collection would be levied. In line with previous demand when service was chargeable it is expected that approx 40 collections per week would take place .As result the service anticipates that income of £37,000 per annum would be generated. If the number of collections falls substantially below 40 the number of agency staff required to deliver this service would reduce but the savings arising from this would be offset by a reduction in income.

7.1. Theme PLACE

7.2. Proposal Title: INTRODUCTION OF CHARGES FOR BULKY WASTE COLLECTIONS

7.3. Breakdown of Savings from the Service

Service Name: Environmental Management Area of Service: Waste Services Cost Centre affected: dr020

Savings 2012/13 Savings 2013/14 Savings 2014/15 £000 £000 £000

Ongoing One Off Ongoing One Off Ongoing One Off Employees Other Costs Income lost (Show as minus) Net Savings Additional Income Generated 37 37 37 (show as a positive figure) Total Savings 37 37 37 Implementation Costs - - - Total Savings less 37 37 37 Implementation Costs

12.4 Financial Impact on another service?

12.5 Details of the Financial Impact on another service –

12.6 Voluntary Sector Financial Impact –

8. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

13.1 There are no legal implications arising from this proposal.

9. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS

10. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS

Risk Control Potential increase in fly tipping may occur Publicise HWRC’s for free disposal Greater use of Enforcement measures where necessary

Discontent from residents who have Advice through contact centre and website that previously benefited from free service items can still be taken to HRWC’s and disposed of free of charge. Signpost residents to use free sites such “Freecycle” “Freeuse” and other charitable organisations

Discontent from residents on low income As above

11. ASSET IMPLICATIONS

16.1 There are no specific asset implications for members to consider arising from this report.

12. JOINT WORKING

17.1 None.

Background Papers Document Place of Inspection There are no background papers.