'Pay as you throw' scheme will not work

Charging people for the amount of waste they produce and penalising those who don't do it properly are poorly thought out ideas that are doomed to failure, according to the Communities and Local Government select committee.In its report on refuse collection, the committee said the proposals were "too timid, too complicated and unlikely to work". And it concluded that planned financial incentive schemes would be seen as an extra charge for a service most householders believe they pay for already through their council tax. Rewards as small as £20 or £30 a year for sorting waste into as many as five different bins, bags or boxes will not outweigh the negative psychological impact of making offending households pay more. Indeed, the schemes could lead to public protest, as well as more fly-tipping and non-payment.The committee also said that alternate weekly collections may not be suitable for all councils, especially highly populated urban centres with crowded streets and limited storage space for bins. And the committee claimed that although recycling has increased in areas where there were alternate collections, there is no proven link between those increases and the new system.Backing up views expressed in Public Servant Daily blogs, the committee felt there was enough public concern, along with a wealth of anecdotal evidence about population explosions in flies, maggots, rats and the like, that there should be more research into the health implications of AWC. One suggestion is for local authorities to have separate food waste collection at least once a week. [Read the blog: Maggots make my life a misery.]Committee chair Dr Phyllis Starkey said: “Our clear conclusion is that no single collection system could suit every authority across the range of all local circumstances. We would like the government come up with a core definition of what householders should expect from their refuse collection. This should include no complicated rules, rubbish collected when the council says it will be and schemes to suit every household from the largest rural home to the most crowded urban area. What we do not want is, as Ben Bradshaw, then the minister for waste, put it, local authorities 'blundering' into AWC before proper consideration and consultation has taken place as to whether this is the best system for that area.”The Department for the Environment said it was "disappointed that on financial incentives, the committee has not recognised the need to try out new and innovative ways of encouraging sustainable waste behaviour".Paul Bettison, chairman of the Local Government Association's environment board, said: "The LGA would like to see more focus on the 90 per cent plus of waste which is not municipal. We also call on government, producers and retailers to work together and reduce the amount of food waste being thrown away. Separate and weekly food waste collection is desirable in principle but there are serious issues of cost and practicality."