|
Representation on
Waste Collection
I write
in response to the Consultation
on amending the powers of Local Authorities regarding presentation
of waste for collection. I write on behalf of the National
HMO Lobby, which is a national association of local community associations
concerned about the impact on their communities of concentrations
of houses in multiple occupation (HMOs). One of the main concerns
of residents is the problems of waste collection where such concentrations
arise. The commonest instance of HMO concentrations is of shared student
houses, and therefore most of our member organisations are in university
towns.
Our answers to your questions are as follows:
Question 1: Which Option do you consider to be the best?
Please provide evidence to support your views.
The National HMO Lobby considers that of the two Options offered,
Option 1 is preferable, 'Civil penalties with an underpinning criminal
offence'. In support, I attach a Briefing Bulletin on Rubbish
Bins prepared by the Lobby, comprising selected comments from
a survey of members' experiences of problems with waste collection
from student houses. It is very clear from these responses that
in the very specific circumstances of HMO concentrations, waste
collection is an endemic problem, which few authorities (if any)
have succeeded in solving. The Lobby considers therefore that these
LAs requires the maximum possible sanctions in order to tackle the
problems.
Question 2: Do you think there should still be an underpinning
criminal offence (and the possibility of a criminal conviction)
for failing to comply with a Section 46 Notice?
Yes, this threat is unlikely to be utilised, but it is important
to have it available, to indicate the importance of the problem.
Question 3: Do you think local authorities should write
to householders before taking action under Section 46? Is there
anything else they should do before issuing a fixed penalty notice?
The National HMO Lobby considers that local authorities should
be able to act as promptly as possible. When whole streets leave
their bins on pavements, obstructing pedestrians, damaging amenity,
encouraging bin abuse, it is important that LAs are able to act
speedily - to set an immediate example, which will quickly be communicated
from one offending household to another.
Question 4: What kinds of actions would you consider to
cause sufficient nuisance to others (the “harm to local amenity
test”) to warrant a financial penalty?
As the Consultation paper says, "Under Section 46 of the Environmental
Protection Act 1990, Local Authorities may instruct householders
how to present their rubbish for collection." A very common
instruction is to put out rubbish bins on a specified day, and return
them to the property immediately after collection. Failure to do
so 'harms local amenity'. Such harm comprises -
(1) disfiguring the streetscene, by leaving bins and associated
rubbish on the public highway: un-returned bins are an eyesore;
(2) obstructing the highway, not only for ordinary pedestrians
(who may be obliged to step into the road), but more especially
for the visually impaired, for carers with push-chairs, or for the
wheel-chair bound: un-returned bins are a health and safety hazard;
(3) encouraging bin abuse, that is, over-turning, using the bins
for 'games' (races, etc) or for 'jokes' (obstructing the street,
placing on parked cars, etc): un-returned bins invite antisocial
behaviour.
Question 5: What level of financial penalty would you consider
to be correct for failing the “harm to local amenity test”
– the current fixed penalty (£75 - £110)? £60
- £80? A lower amount?
The National HMO Lobby recommends retaining the present level of
financial penalty.
Question 6: Under current arrangements, local authorities
retain the receipts from any Fixed Penalty Notices issued. What
are your views on local authorities only keeping their processing
costs, rather than the full amount of the penalty, under a new civil
sanction regime?
The National HMO Lobby considers that local authorities should
keep the full amount of any Fixed Penalty Notices, to put towards
improvements in waste collection, especially recycling.
Question 7: What would be the right level of fine under
the underpinning criminal offence (if retained) for failure to comply
with a Section 46 Notice (currently this is up to £1000)?
The National HMO Lobby considers that the present level of fine
should be retained.
Question 8: Do you think householders should be able to
appeal against penalties under Section 46?
Yes.
Dr Richard Tyler, Co-ordinator, National HMO Lobby, 7 March 2012
National HMO Lobby
email: hmolobby@hotmail.com
website: www.hmolobby.org.uk
|