Agenda item

ES20156

The report was being presented to outline the actions that were being planned to support the Council's Fly Tipping Action Plan.

It was noted that the Portfolio Plan for Public Protection and Enforcement included a commitment to keep Bromley's streets clean and green, to reduce fly tipping, littering and dog fouling. A target had been set to reduce the number of fly tippings within the borough to less than 3000 per annum. This included a commitment to commence enforcement action against 10% of incidents of fly tipping.

In the first 3/4 of 2021/22 Veolia had attended and removed 2157 fly tipping incidents--226 of these had been subject to enforcement activity. A new project had been initiated by Veolia under the umbrella of ‘Your Waste is Your Responsibility’. A campaign had been run by Veolia in Penge and a second  campaign was due to be run in Mottingham.

In November 2021, a target hardening scheme was put in place at Mottingham Recreation Ground at a cost of £85,000. During the first quarter of 22/23 it was the aim of the Department to launch a new Action Plan; this was anticipated to be a more robust Action Plan to deter fly tipping within the Borough. The Enforcement Team had recently been subject to restructuring, this meant the team’s flexibility had been increased, along with its robustness to deal with fly tipping--as the number of officers that were available to deal with fly tipping had been increased from 1 to 4.

The Chairman was pleased to note the reduction in the number of fly tipping incidents, especially in Penge. A key factor in the reduction in the number of flight tipping incidents was attributed to better education, engagement and general raising of awareness. The Portfolio Holder pointed out that the Street Enforcement Manager had been working closely with Veolia to help their operatives become more successful in finding relevant evidence in fly tipped rubbish which could indicate who had been responsible for the fly tipping incident.

A Member referenced page 23 of the report and noted that out of 226 enforcement referrals, 77 enforcement actions had been undertaken of various types and she asked what had happened with respect to the remaining 149? She also asked if the public took any notice of warning letters and formal notices.

The Street Enforcement Manager answered and said that the remaining 149 had not progressed beyond the investigation stage for various reasons which included the unwillingness of witnesses to come forward and an inability to track down the offenders. He had drafted new notices for the Enforcement Team to work with and he expected this situation to improve. He was looking at new ways to gather information and subsequently enforce. He felt that in the past Bromley had been too insular in its approach and felt that a more intelligence based approach was required and to this end he had made new contacts with other councils and with the Environment Agency. It was hoped that this collaborative approach with other stakeholders would enable the sharing of information and help to make the targeting of individuals more successful. He added that using warning letters did indeed seem to be successful so far. It was noted that at the moment details of fly tipping prosecutions were not being published, but the implementation of a ‘wall of shame’ was something that was being considered, but would need to be assessed by the Legal Team first.

The Chairman enquired what support was required from Bromley's internal Communications Team. The Street Enforcement Manager responded and said that a more streamlined corporate message would be helpful. The Council needed to be smart in its use of communications. The Director said that this was something he would look into.

A Member expressed  the view that if LBB was only taking action against a third of offenders then this was unsatisfactory. He also pointed out that when officers or Veolia operatives looked through rubbish and found evidence of an address, in most cases this would be the naïve member of the public who had unknowingly used an unregistered dumper. He said that to get to the heart of the matter the Council would need to take enforcement action against the unregistered dumpers. 

The Street Enforcement Manager answered and said that more effort was required to make the general public more aware of the issues and that they should look at the licences of anyone that they proposed to use to dump their rubbish. It was the case that there were occasions when the public knew who had taken their rubbish but would not provide a supporting witness statement. It was possible that the Council could invoke powers under the Environment Act 1995 that could force the disclosure of information. It was anticipated that the Council could work with the police and seize vehicles where appropriate.

A Member praised the use of prominent signs that had been used to highlight the level of fines that could be imposed for fly tipping. She said that she had noticed their effectiveness in High Elms and hoped that they could be used more widely. Mr Laws responded and said that a report from the Fly Tipping Working Group was due shortly and after looking at this, officers would be looking at the possible use of signs in fly tipping hotspots, along with the estimated costings. 

A discussion took place regarding the different types of fly tipping notices and it was explained that the money from the fines went back into neighbourhood management budget lines. It was noted that the use of cameras and CCTV required authorisation from a Magistrate and that Veolia were being encouraged to pick up more rubbish so that there were not cluster sites of rubbish developing, as ‘rubbish bred rubbish’.

RESOLVED that the Fly Tipping Action Plan update be noted  and that the Director would look into how the Communications Team could better support the Fly Tipping Action Plan initiatives.