Agenda item

Consideration was given to a report providing an overview of the national and local position in relation to fly tipping, with a focus on the prevention, investigation and enforcement of fly tipping offences.

In discussion, Members requested further narrative around the effects of COVID on fly-tipping and the service’s response. The response from officers described the type of people who fly-tip. During lockdowns there had been an increase in footfall in rural areas, so more fly-tips were identified and reported.

Members further expressed interest in knowing more about how many costs are recouped in fines. The gap between costs and the moneys recouped from Fixed Penalty Notices was vast, as officers clarified. There was a significant backlog of serious fly-tipping offences entering the court process.

Members also complimented the effectiveness of the service and expressed interest in more details around how the team’s work dovetails with work by the housing teams. It was clarified that the housing teams report evidential opportunities into the service.

Members also requested further information in respect of how landlords are involved. Where a problem area is identified, it was explained that the team engages landlords to try to better manage waste from the property. It can be very hard to prove who has committed the offence, but where there is evidence, the operational processes between referral and enforcement are strong. The service engages with both landlord associations.

Members expressed satisfaction with the rapidity of response by officers and expressed interest in knowing more about the proactive steps being taken to educate residents so that there is a strong culture of individual responsibility around not tolerating fly tipping. For example, how well are people aware of the need to check that their waste collector is legitimate? The response from officers described messaging and prevention campaigns, noting there is more work to do in this area. Officers also noted use of overt and covert CCTV for deterrent and evidentiary surveillance of fly-tipping.

Members requested further clarification around the actions the Council takes when the identity of a fly-tipper is discovered. The response from officers described the process of identifying evidence. Where this is not possible, the next steps are to pursue information sharing from a Duty of Care angle.

Regarding small fly tips, further details were requested around proactive measures to incentivise residents to go through the Council rather than calling on collectors that end up doing the small waste tips. The response from officers noted the willingness of the service to do more to leverage engagement groups. Proactive work around hotspots is primarily focused work in response to small tips. The best way is to get people within the community to talk to people in the community. Further, a 12-month communications plan is currently in development.

The suggestion was offered that the forthcoming communications plan include information about how to report fly tipping, and clarification was requested around how often the Council exercises its rights to make private landlords clear fly-tipped refuse from their property. The response from officers described the exercise of this power as a routine activity that is often called for within the community.

Members expressed thanks to the team for resolving specific fly tipping events in several wards.It was suggested that in future a representative from the litter picking team could be invited to join the meeting. Clarification was requested around the evidence collection process and whether officers have the right to proceed or whether they have to wait for the environmental teams. The response from officers indicated that officers keep individuals updated where they are directly affected, and whilst there is a huge impact on communities more broadly, there is not capacity to update everyone who reports a fly tip. The service is working towards a regular communication model that includes environmental data.

Members indicated the difficulty associated with coordinating multiple households to give testimony. The response from officers concurred tha nothing stops the council from presenting a case with one witness, but in order to plunge resources into prosecution more witnesses are preferred. Where there is one witness, it is up to a determination of the court as far as credibility, with the criminal procedures requiring proof beyond all reasonable doubt. Evidential procedures therefore introduce limitations, but it was noted that the Council generally wins court cases. Covert surveillance is better for identifying fly tippers, whereas overt is better for deterring.

Clarification was requested around cautions. The response from officers identified cautions as informal and described the limited effect of these in the context of fly-tipping.

Resolved:-

1.    That the report be noted.

2.    That members be invited to feed into the development of the Enviro Crime Strategy.

3.    That the good reports on the active response by estate caretakers and litter picking teams be noted, and that consideration be given to ways to further engage residents toward cultivating local pride and a culture where eliminating littering and fly tipping is everyone’s responsibility.

4.    That the fantastic work and major contributions by litter picking teams and volunteers be noted, and further ways be sought whereby those groups can be further recognised and engaged.

5.    That impacts of fly tipping on the Housing Revenue Account be provided outside the meeting.

6.    That the next update include details of the development of the 12 month communications plan.