The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has announced that it is to push ahead with legislation that bans councils in England from charging residents for using household waste recycling centres, despite half of respondents to a discussion paper opposing the proposal.

Discussion paper background

The ‘Preventing “backdoor” charges at household waste recycling centres’ discussion paper was released in January after DCLG became ‘aware’ that some LAs have introduced, or plan to introduce, a charge to those accessing certain HWRCs to dispose of household waste and/or household recycling. (For example, the Dorset Waste Partnership is considering charging residents entry fees to its HWRCs, alongside a raft of other options, in a bid to save money.)

DCLG said it believes that residents ‘deserve a comprehensive waste and recycling service in return for the £122 a month council tax typical B and D households pay’ and that councils who are charging residents at ‘discretionary’ HWRCs (i.e. those not covered by the Environmental Protection Act 1990), are ‘attempting to impose a “backdoor” charge, circumventing the will of Parliament and the Government who have a clearly expressed policy of free-to-use centres for residents’.

According to central government, it is ‘concerned’ that these charges will ‘inconvenience residents; increase fly-tipping and back-yard burning; and make recycling harder for people rather than… easier’.

As such, it put forward draft legislation for discussion that prevents councils from introducing charges to residents to dispose of household waste and/or recycling (charges for non-residents and non-household waste/recycling may still apply).

After reviewing the responses, Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles has said that he is ‘not persuaded' by the arguments of those opposing government’s plans to introduce the ban, and will push with implementing two pieces of secondary legislation – ‘Local Government (Prohibition of Charges for the Deposit of Household Waste at a Household Waste Recycling Centre) (England) Order 2015’ and ‘Local Authorities (Prohibition of Charging Residents to Deposit Household Waste) Order 2015’ – which will come into effect from 31 March 2015.

Government response

According to the government response, released on Wednesday (4 March), there were 61 respondents to the discussion paper (however two of these were discounted as they ‘did not address the issues of the discussion paper’), the majority of which coming from local authorities.

Although the department does not give exact figures, the response reveals that ‘half of respondents welcomed the proposal …while, of the half that did not, many presented helpful ideas as to how centres at risk of closure can stay open without local authorities resorting to charging their residents to dispose of household waste and recycling at them’.

However, it said that it was ‘not persuaded by the arguments of those respondents opposing the government’s proposed approach’, and disagreed that the move was ‘anti-localist’ (as the way in which waste is handled in local authorities is usually a local decision – as covered by the Localism Act), stating that government ‘clearly has a role to play in working with councils in England to improve and safeguard frontline services for residents, in return for the central funding that councils receive from national taxation’.

A ‘number of respondents’ reportedly noted that budget cuts from central government are presenting ‘challenges’ to providing HWRCs and implementing charges could rectify that this. However, DCLG outlines that ‘councils have continued to balance their books while public satisfaction with services has been maintained over this Parliament, showing the scope for efficiencies. Rather than trying to introduce ‘backdoor’ charges, the government believes councils should be seeking to deliver sensible savings from more joint working, improved procurement, cutting fraud and better property asset management.’

It highlighted the ‘richness of ideas that came back’ to the call for ideas on provisioning for HWRCs – including suggestions to change opening times, develop reuse facilities on-site, and develop ‘more attractive’ cost tariffs for local businesses using centres –and therefore stated that it did not agree the scenario of ‘charge or close’ was ‘an inevitable one’.

Touching on the fact that the discussion paper was only open for comment for four weeks (rather than the usual 12-week consultation period for ‘new or contentious’ policy), the government department said that this did not mean that it received a ‘limited response’ as it made 'significant attempts to ensure that those who could be affected by the proposals had sight of the discussion paper’, including taking out an article in a national newspaper.

The response reads: ‘The government generally encourages local authorities to innovate and confidently use the general power of competence to act for their communities and in their own financial interest to generate efficiencies and savings. However, having regard to: the government’s clearly expressed policy of free to use centres for residents; residents deserving a comprehensive waste and recycling service in return for the council tax each household pays; and a concern these charges will not be beneficial to residents or the community, the government considers that it is, in this instance, appropriate to limit local authorities’ power to charge and the general power of competence.

‘The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, having given due consideration to the responses received to the consultation and for the reasons outlined above, is therefore introducing this secondary legislation.’

Local authorities voice ‘extreme disappointment’ with decision

The Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee (LARAC) has expressed ‘extreme disappointment’ with the decision, voicing ‘concern’ that consultation submissions seem to have been ignored and questioning if the department had ‘any intention to listen to the concerns of the industry’.

It added that the legislation could mean that LAs will have ‘greater restrictions on how they balance budgets with a greater possibility of services being cut’.

Lee Marshall, Chief Executive Officer of LARAC, said: “The government response to the consultation submissions is very disappointing and appears to cherry-pick the bits it wants from the responses to uphold its stance. The fact that there was no clear majority view shows that LARAC was right in suggesting roundtable discussion with government to take the matter forward. The fact this offer has not even been acknowledged, along with the undue haste with which this has been railroaded through, gives the impression that this was a consultation in name only.”

LARAC also questioned the justification given by the government that it had undertaken a ‘thorough’ consultation, for example, by taking out an article in a national newspaper, stating that this ‘falls short of the levels of consultation that local authorities would be expected to undertake’. It added that the fact DCLG says it wrote to ‘the “Environmental Standards Agency”, an organisation that does not exist, [also] implies that [the] consultation process was not robust’.

Read the government response to the HWRC charging discussion paper, or find out more about LA proposals to charge for HWRC use.