Agenda item

Report ES13144

The Committee received the latest update on budget monitoring position for the Environment Portfolio, based on expenditure and activity levels up to 30^th September 2013, and on progress with the implementation of the selected projects within the Member Priority Initiatives. Budget monitoring showed a projected overspend of £670k.

The Committee discussed the advice that had been received from the Environment Agency (EA) that fallen leaves collected from roads should not be composted due to concerns about contaminated materials entering the food-chain. This was guidance and not a change in legislation (although the EA had linked the guidance to the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010) but there was also market pressure from processors and the agricultural sector. Officers considered that the guidance was based on questionable test results, and that most leaf fall from roads and pavements could be safely composted, if crushed material was excluded and treated as detritus. Councillor Julian Grainger commented that there was evidence about pollution levels at varying distances from different types of roads, and that there should be scope for using leaves from grass verges. The Council, in common with other authorities, had been lobbying hard on this issue and pressing for further testing. As the Council was projecting additional costs of £140k in 2013/14 due to this problem and the higher cost of recycling detritus the Committee considered that there was a good case for paying for independent testing. The Committee suggested that the Environment Agency be asked first whether the guidance could be relaxed if testing confirmed that leaves from the highway were acceptable.

Officers reported that they would be meeting with DEFRA in a couple of weeks, following which there would be more clarity about separation of materials for recycling for kerbside collection. Residents wanted the convenience of one box, whereas the industry, supported by the European Union, was pressing for greater separation. However, the major concern for the industry was keeping glass and paper separate, which Bromley’s collection method already achieved. Paper recycling tonnages had reduced leading to a projected budget deficit of £130k. It was unclear why this was the case, but it was probably due to more residents moving to electronic forms of communication. It was confirmed that polystyrene could not currently be recycled, but it was incinerated where possible rather than sent for landfill.

The Committee requested that the Budget Monitoring Summary should provide more information on new variations since the last report, as well as since the original budget.

The report included a recommendation that the Executive be requested to approve the drawdown of £200k held in central contingency for the street cleansing contract to meet the costs of additional street cleaning needed following the recent storm and due to new requirements for the disposal of leaves and detritus. The Portfolio Holder stated that as this was largely a new burden the money should be found corporately and not from the environment street cleaning contingency. The Committee supported this approach. 

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder be recommended to

(1) endorse the latest 2013/14 budget projection for the Environment Portfolio;

(2) note the progress of the implementation of the Environment projects within the Member Priority Initiatives programme; and

(3) request that the Executive provides additional funding in 2013/14, without drawing down from the £200k held in central contingency for the street cleansing contract, to meet additional disposal costs for leaves and detritus.