Agenda item

To provide a further update on the implementation timescales of the Environment Act 2021, in respect of:

·         Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging,

·         Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) for drinks containers,

·         New requirements on local authorities to implement greater Consistency in Household Recycling, now ‘Simpler Recycling’ (including, separate collections of waste materials, establishing separate weekly food waste collections and providing free fortnightly garden waste collections).

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste presented the report.

As previously reported to this Committee, the Government’s Resources and Waste Strategy was published in 2018, which identified several new policies that would have a significant impact on local authorities in relation to their waste and street cleansing duties. These included three interrelated key projects:

·     Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging,

·     Deposit Return Scheme (DRS)for drinks containers, and

·     Simpler Recycling - New requirements on Local Authorities (LA’s) to implement greaterconsistency in household recycling (including separate collections of waste materials, separate weekly food waste collections and providing free fortnightly garden waste collections)

On the 28^th July 2023 DEFRA wrote to all Council’s advising that the Extended Producer Responsibility for packaging payments would be deferred from October 2024 to October 2025. The aim of this policy was to ensure producers of packaging pay for the cost of recycling their products.

In terms of the wider Resource & Waste reforms, the delivery of the Deposit Return Scheme for cans and plastic bottles to be taken back to retailers, is to proceed to current timescales and be introduced from October 2025.

Weekly food waste collections were required to take place from all households by 31^st March 2026 (unless a transitional arrangement is agreed). DEFRA were gathering further evidence on caddy liners via statutory guidance consultation. The financial implications, alongside indicative transitional capital funding from DEFRA, of this change can be found in Section 4 of this report.

Furthermore, DEFRA had confirmed that the Council would not be required to provide free garden waste collections, and would be offered as an additional service.

On the 9^th January 2024, DEFRA wrote to Chief Executive’s to outline the proposed levels of funding for the transitional capital costs. South Kesteven District Council had been offered £1.37m to cover nine additional food waste collections and food waste caddies for every household.

DEFRA were yet to release information on the level of funding for resource transitional costs.

It was highlighted that the information from DEFRA outlined the need for the development of the new depot, as it was at its full capacity.

It was queried whether the Council were looking to procure vehicles with other Local Authorities as a joint service to buy the vehicles in bulk for possible savings.

One Member raised concern that the new depot and the additional vehicles on the road would not be producing more carbon than saving with the scheme.

The Leader of the Council clarified that authorities usually purchased vehicles through framework or consortium meaning a standard price for other local authorities.

It was emphasised that the scheme would not mean an additional 240l bin for constituents to find storage space for. The scheme would mean constituents would be situated with a small waste caddy that would be collected weekly.

It was confirmed that on the 30^th May 2023, Cabinet approved the Lincolnshire Framework for purchase of refuse collection vehicles.

One Member queried whether can and bottle banks still existed.

The revenue for can and bottle banks was slowly decreasing due to costs and being a target for vandalism. Objects other than glass were also being put into the can and bottle banks.

Further concern was raised on the storage of the food waste caddy for the rollout in March 2026.

It was noted that there had previously been a successful trial with food waste caddies, however, it had stopped due to an agreement on the budget of the scheme with Lincolnshire County Council.

Clarification was sought around the difference between a kitchen caddy and a curb side caddy.

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste clarified that a small kitchen caddy would be kept inside to hold any food waste and would then be taken outside to a larger caddy in order to be emptied by waste operatives.

It was noted that the addition of new waste collection vehicles to the Council’s vehicle fleet had the potential to increase operational carbon emissions for the Council.

One Member sought clarification around the term ‘circular economy’.

The financial viability of the scheme was queried. It was highlighted that the first year of the roll out of the scheme would cost in excess of £3m.

A circular economy was a process of taking an object that had been recycled and turning it into a fresh use of an object and then recycling it again.

The Head of Waste and Markets confirmed that the Council were reviewing their fleet strategy to mitigate carbon footprint.

Clarification was sought on the methodology on how DEFRA had concluded the need for 9 fleet vehicles, whereas, the Council had calculated the need for 12.

It was confirmed that the number provided by DEFRA had been worked out based on local complexities with the rurality and the size of the District. DEFRA had used indexes which were applied to households and figures. 

The Leader of the Council confirmed that there would be no payback from the Council, as a result of food waste collections. Food waste was already being collected, however, the Environment Act stated that food waste must be collected separately, which would become a mandatory service. 

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste confirmed that he would liaise with the S151 Officer to discuss the new burdens funding and how the scheme would be balanced along the Council’s budget. It was confirmed that the finance aspects of the scheme would be brought back to the Committee.

An update from DEFRA had not yet been provided on any additional costs. They had provided details on transitional revenue costs and the ongoing resource costs.

That the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

Note the contents of the report, the revised timescales applied by Government and funding implications.