Brown bin charges thrown out by Craven District Council after uproar

Councillors have overturned a decision to start charging for garden waste collection

Councillors have overturned a decision to start charging for garden waste collection

First published in News

Controversial proposals to start charging for garden waste collection have been scrapped by councillors.

Craven District Council’s policy committee had recommended bringing in an annual £24 charge for the currently free service.

The service, which officers expected would be taken up by around a third of residents who use brown bins, would have meant savings of around £148,000 per year.

But at the full council meeting, it was overturned after several councillors reported how unpopular it was with members of the public.

Coun Carl Lis (Cons) acknowledged that the charge would be unpopular, but stressed that the council needed to make additional savings of £300,000.

“It is a reduction in service, but we are forced into having to make stark choices, and no-one has come up with an alternative how to find savings,” he said.

He said the introduction of charging would be accompanied by a scheme to encourage residents to buy subsidised composting bins.

He added that most other authorities were either bringing them in or considering charging.

But councillors opposed to charging said it was unfair, that residents would end up putting garden waste in general waste bins or resort to fly tipping and that the council’s recycling targets would be reduced.

Coun Mark Wheeler (Lib Dem) said the service, brought in by the council, had been taken up enthusiastically by residents and it would be unfair to start charging for it now.

He said: “There are clearly a number of people who resent this, and who can blame them. I’ve been to parish council meetings and thanked residents for helping us hit our recycling targets, and now we’re going to repay them by charging them £24 per year. This is not a green initiative, this is a cash cow.”

Coun Robert Heseltine (Ind) said he had been lobbied by members of the public.

“What we will have is a refuse wagon chasing all over Craven picking up one bin here and another bin there, and what will that do to our carbon footprint?” he said.

Coun Alan Sutcliffe (Cons) said he accepted the council needed to make savings, but such a charge would mean negative public relations.

Coun Ken Hart (Ind) said no-one he had spoken to had thought it was a good idea.

“Brown bins were introduced by this council, not the taxpayer,” he said.

Deputy leader Coun Richard Foster (Cons) said the council had to make savings of £300,000 and charging would generate savings of around £150,000.

“People will disagree, and I totally understand. Another option would be to simply remove the service, but we are in challenging times, and it is really starting to bite into Craven,” he said.

A recorded vote was taken, with 12 councillors voting against charging, ten for, and six abstentions.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:16am Thu 20 Dec 12

pjl20 says...

Perhaps the best solution to the problems of council costs and subsequent attempts at charging householders for some waste collections is to privatise the whole of this function?

We are rapidly approaching the stage where local councils are becoming an anachronism in many areas. What is so wrong with having many of these services handled by the private sector?
Perhaps the best solution to the problems of council costs and subsequent attempts at charging householders for some waste collections is to privatise the whole of this function? We are rapidly approaching the stage where local councils are becoming an anachronism in many areas. What is so wrong with having many of these services handled by the private sector? pjl20
  • Score: 0

6:12pm Thu 20 Dec 12

annoyed59 says...

Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec.
Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec. annoyed59
  • Score: 0

8:34am Fri 21 Dec 12

Lord Newbold says...

annoyed59 wrote:
Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec.
Why get rid of a chief executive, just because they are drawing £100k in salary. It seems par for the course these days. At the rate Central Government are introducing cuts to benefits, and other incidentals like jobs. These highly paid chiefs only cost more if you get rid of them, there would be the golden handshake followed by a percentage of their salary to be paid to purchase the remaining years of their contract. In addition to a very hefty pension. Further, they would have to increase the payments to those who took on the dual task of running two organisations.
[quote][p][bold]annoyed59[/bold] wrote: Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec.[/p][/quote]Why get rid of a chief executive, just because they are drawing £100k in salary. It seems par for the course these days. At the rate Central Government are introducing cuts to benefits, and other incidentals like jobs. These highly paid chiefs only cost more if you get rid of them, there would be the golden handshake followed by a percentage of their salary to be paid to purchase the remaining years of their contract. In addition to a very hefty pension. Further, they would have to increase the payments to those who took on the dual task of running two organisations. Lord Newbold
  • Score: 0

9:09am Fri 21 Dec 12

The Yorkshireman says...

Chief exec £100k Deputy Chief Exec £75k surely there is a saving to me bade there somewhere? How much is the Council's annual budget again.. £7m?
No golden handshake, just resturcture and say goodbye; it works for the rest of the officers!
Chief exec £100k Deputy Chief Exec £75k surely there is a saving to me bade there somewhere? How much is the Council's annual budget again.. £7m? No golden handshake, just resturcture and say goodbye; it works for the rest of the officers! The Yorkshireman
  • Score: 0

10:11am Fri 21 Dec 12

Lord Newbold says...

The Yorkshireman wrote:
Chief exec £100k Deputy Chief Exec £75k surely there is a saving to me bade there somewhere? How much is the Council's annual budget again.. £7m?
No golden handshake, just resturcture and say goodbye; it works for the rest of the officers!
That only works with miner, and a real Conservative Leader.

With overall Control.
[quote][p][bold]The Yorkshireman[/bold] wrote: Chief exec £100k Deputy Chief Exec £75k surely there is a saving to me bade there somewhere? How much is the Council's annual budget again.. £7m? No golden handshake, just resturcture and say goodbye; it works for the rest of the officers![/p][/quote]That only works with miner, and a real Conservative Leader. With overall Control. Lord Newbold
  • Score: 0

1:13pm Fri 21 Dec 12

annoyed59 says...

Lord Newbold wrote:
annoyed59 wrote: Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec.
Why get rid of a chief executive, just because they are drawing £100k in salary. It seems par for the course these days. At the rate Central Government are introducing cuts to benefits, and other incidentals like jobs. These highly paid chiefs only cost more if you get rid of them, there would be the golden handshake followed by a percentage of their salary to be paid to purchase the remaining years of their contract. In addition to a very hefty pension. Further, they would have to increase the payments to those who took on the dual task of running two organisations.
Well when you are looking at reduced services next year Lord Newbould I'm sure you will be the first to put your hand in your pocket and pay extra for them.
[quote][p][bold]Lord Newbold[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]annoyed59[/bold] wrote: Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec.[/p][/quote]Why get rid of a chief executive, just because they are drawing £100k in salary. It seems par for the course these days. At the rate Central Government are introducing cuts to benefits, and other incidentals like jobs. These highly paid chiefs only cost more if you get rid of them, there would be the golden handshake followed by a percentage of their salary to be paid to purchase the remaining years of their contract. In addition to a very hefty pension. Further, they would have to increase the payments to those who took on the dual task of running two organisations.[/p][/quote]Well when you are looking at reduced services next year Lord Newbould I'm sure you will be the first to put your hand in your pocket and pay extra for them. annoyed59
  • Score: 0

3:54pm Fri 21 Dec 12

Lord Newbold says...

annoyed59 wrote:
Lord Newbold wrote:
annoyed59 wrote: Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec.
Why get rid of a chief executive, just because they are drawing £100k in salary. It seems par for the course these days. At the rate Central Government are introducing cuts to benefits, and other incidentals like jobs. These highly paid chiefs only cost more if you get rid of them, there would be the golden handshake followed by a percentage of their salary to be paid to purchase the remaining years of their contract. In addition to a very hefty pension. Further, they would have to increase the payments to those who took on the dual task of running two organisations.
Well when you are looking at reduced services next year Lord Newbould I'm sure you will be the first to put your hand in your pocket and pay extra for them.
the hierarchy within the Council Management team are incompetent, then they should be sacked like any other hourly paid employee.
[quote][p][bold]annoyed59[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lord Newbold[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]annoyed59[/bold] wrote: Another saving is to get rid if the chief exec and share Harrogate's. Craven may be big in area but tiny in comparison to other Local Authorities and doesn't need a 100k a year chief exec.[/p][/quote]Why get rid of a chief executive, just because they are drawing £100k in salary. It seems par for the course these days. At the rate Central Government are introducing cuts to benefits, and other incidentals like jobs. These highly paid chiefs only cost more if you get rid of them, there would be the golden handshake followed by a percentage of their salary to be paid to purchase the remaining years of their contract. In addition to a very hefty pension. Further, they would have to increase the payments to those who took on the dual task of running two organisations.[/p][/quote]Well when you are looking at reduced services next year Lord Newbould I'm sure you will be the first to put your hand in your pocket and pay extra for them.[/p][/quote]the hierarchy within the Council Management team are incompetent, then they should be sacked like any other hourly paid employee. Lord Newbold
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree