Agenda item

Nicola Herbert, Head of Waste, was in attendance to respond to Members’ questions in respect of her report on the Success of the Council’s Food Waste Scheme as set out in the agenda pack.

With regard to the recent engagement exercise that had taken place to increase resident take-up, Members enquired where the targeted engagement areas for food waste collection had taken place. It was confirmed that the focus had mainly been in the southern boroughs, particularly Botwell, based on crew feedback and lower participation rates.

At the request of the Committee, it was agreed that, after the meeting, the Head of Waste would provide a list of the sites that had taken part in the food waste in flats trials, a list of the flatted sites that currently had a food waste bin and a list of the wards that had been visited during the 2023/2024 door knocking programme.  

Members sought clarity on current participation rates for food waste recycling, noting past efforts to increase them. The Committee was advised that targeted engagement had improved registration for the service from 20% to 60% of nearly 5000 targeted properties.

In response to questions regarding the continuation of green roadshows to boost food waste recycling, Members heard that these continued to be very successful, with 19 events in the previous year resulting in 240 new sign-ups.

Councillors questioned the appearance and functionality of food waste units installed in flats. It was explained that they were tailored to each site, with a focus on hygienic and user-friendly designs to encourage use and minimise cleaning. It was agreed that an image of the Glasdon food waste housing unit would be provided to the Committee after the meeting.

Further concerns were raised by Members about potential odour and vermin issues with food waste wheelie bins. The Head of Waste assured the Committee that trials showed no such problems and that the Council had measures to maintain cleanliness and safe distance from residences.

Councillors sought further clarity regarding future targets for food waste caddy distribution and stock management. It was confirmed that the goal was to add 20,000 properties to the service by the end of the financial year. Regular ordering approximately every three months would ensure supply.

In response to Members’ questions about the provision of biodegradable food waste bags and their durability, it was confirmed that residents would receive a yearly supply, with a maximum of two rolls per property to prevent wastage and inefficiency. If needed, additional bags could be ordered online or sourced from local libraries.

The importance of communicating the environmental impact of food waste in landfills was highlighted by the Select Committee. In response to this, it was clarified that, while Hillingdon Council did not landfill general waste, reducing food waste remained environmentally beneficial due to its high carbon content.

Members enquired about the financial benefits of food waste recycling and the use of the anaerobic digestion facility in Mitcham. It was explained that the cost savings from waste disposal were significant, and the facility’s ability to sell bioenergy to the National Grid enabled lower processing costs.

Councillors enquired why garden and food waste were processed separately. It was confirmed that the current facility in Mitcham did not offer dry anaerobic digestion, and the decision had been made by the West London Waste Authority for economic reasons. At the request of the Committee Members, it was agreed that, after the meeting,  the Head of Waste would clarify whether dry anaerobic digestion had been considered for the processing of mixed food and garden waste.

In response to further questions from the Select Committee, it was confirmed that food waste recycling had not replaced garden composting which continued at a significant scale in Harefield.

With regard to the nature of businesses involved in the food waste trial, Councillors were informed that hotels and cash-and-carries had participated. The importance of proper disposal without packaging to avoid additional costs was highlighted.

Members enquired whether high food waste-producing businesses would require more frequent collections. It was confirmed that the Council offered flexible collections to all businesses and would assess the need for increased frequency on a case-by-case basis.

Members expressed concerns about health and safety implications for food establishments, particularly regarding waste security and potential issues with vermin. They questioned the impact of the Council’s service on these matters. In response to this, the Select Committee was assured that the containers provided by the Council were secure and had lids to prevent decomposition and vermin attraction within a week. The Head of Waste mentioned that businesses were not obligated to use the Council’s service if it was not commercially viable for them to do so and could opt for private contractors instead. It was further confirmed that non-compliance would be addressed by enforcement teams.

The Chair, Councillor Bridges, thanked the Head of Waste for her informative responses and attendance.

RESOLVED: That the Residents’ Services Select Committee:

1.    Noted the success of the food waste recycling scheme to date; and

2.    Noted the planned works to continue the expansion of the food waste recycling service.