Agenda item

Councillor Wayne Bridges (Cabinet Member for Community & Environment) was in attendance to highlight key points in the report and provide an update in respect of the Council’s Commercial Waste and General Waste Services.

With regard to commercial trade waste, the Cabinet Member noted that 79 new commercial waste contracts had been gained while 98 had been lost, largely due to non?payment and price sensitivity. It was explained that 43 of the 79 new contracts related to outstanding debts. Officers had undertaken substantial work in this area, and changes were already underway. One early change had involved improving competitiveness by removing publicly available costings, which had previously enabled competitors to undercut the Council. This measure was expected to strengthen the Council’s market position and support the promotion of the service. It was noted that, despite the reduction in customer numbers, income had increased because the new customers were of higher quality and more reliable. Councillor Bridges expressed confidence that performance would continue to improve and committed to keeping the Committee updated.

Councillor Bridges then addressed food waste collection, which had been widely publicised locally and nationally. It was explained that the service was being rolled out to approximately 2,200 properties above shops and 17,000 private block properties, with completion expected within six weeks. The Councillor formally recorded thanks to officers for their hard work on this significant undertaking. He highlighted the financial benefits of food waste recycling, noting the stark contrast between the disposal cost of food waste (£12.79 per tonne) and general waste (£119.28 per tonne). It was stated that the rollout was being monitored case by case, feedback from ward councillors was being received, and any issues would be addressed as they arose.

The Cabinet Member proceeded to discuss the significant issue of fly?tipping in the Borough, acknowledging that it was a national problem and that Hillingdon was not exempt. He reported the introduction of new processes to tackle the issue, including the “Waste Drop and Go” initiative, which had been successful to date. Events had already taken place in Charville and Hillingdon West. In Charville, 54 cars and six walk?ins had participated, resulting in the collection of 1.8 tonnes of waste. The Hillingdon West event at the Battle of Britain Bunker had received 90 visitors—an increase of 50%—and had collected just under 2.1 tonnes of waste. Members heard that further events were planned, with the next due to take place at Harlington Road Depot.

Councillor Bridges also reported that he had introduced unannounced spot checks across the Borough the previous week, undertaken jointly with officers from waste services, the anti?social behaviour team, APCOA, and other service providers. Spot checks had taken place in Charville and on New Broadway in Hillingdon East, where instances of fly?tipping had been identified and were being investigated. Additional visits were planned, and Councillors across the Borough would be engaged to identify and respond to emerging hotspots.

Dan Kennedy, Corporate Director of Residents Services and Jordan Groves, Head of Waste and Green Spaces, were also in attendance. The Head of Waste and Green Spaces provided a brief summary of the key points in the report which presented an overview of waste and recycling services performance for 2025–26 to date, including commercial waste, domestic collections, recycling improvements, and the rollout of the simpler recycling programme.

It was reported that Commercial Waste Services continued to operate in a challenging and competitive market. During the year, 79 new contracts had been gained, generating just under £200,000, while 98 contracts had ended, primarily due to non?payment or business closures, which reflected wider trends. Despite the overall reduction in contract numbers, Members heard that the service had reported a net income gain of nearly £60,000, highlighting the service’s focus on quality over quantity. Compliance work between the commercial waste team and the anti?social behaviour team had strengthened, particularly where issues such as fly?tipping or the absence of lawful waste contracts had arisen.

Domestic waste services were reported to have remained largely stable. It was noted that the garden waste service had moved to a paid subscription model, and the Council was exploring ways to increase participation. At the time of the report, over 23,000 households were subscribed, generating £1.62 million in income. The Christmas period had led to an increase in missed collection reports due to altered collection schedules, which had caused temporary confusion for residents. An ageing vehicle fleet had created operational challenges, and capital investment for replacements had been included in the 2026 capital budget and beyond.

The Committee was informed that recycling services continued to expand. Although some quality issues had been identified with the supply of recycling and food?waste sacks, remedial measures were underway. Contamination?reduction initiatives showed positive progress and were supported by crew?led education and trials of reverse?litter bins in communal settings. The simpler recycling rollout remained on schedule. Surveys for flats above shops had been completed, deliveries were underway, and officers were actively engaging with residents to explain the purpose of the service. It was confirmed that 19,000 additional properties had already received the service. The rollout to private blocks was expected to be completed shortly, and the flats?above?shops element was expected to be completed by 31 March 2026.

Performance indicators were reported to be positive overall. Commercial waste was forecast to generate £2.1 million in income. The Harefield Civic Amenity Site diversion rate had risen to 74%, and recycling contamination continued to decrease in monitored areas. Reports from October, November and December showed a reduction in refuse waste collected compared with the same period the previous year, resulting in disposal?cost savings. It was noted that the Council’s recycling rate remained above the London average, having increased from 36.7% in 2023 to 39% as of December 2025. Additionally, 836 more tonnes of household food waste had been collected between April and November 2025 compared with the previous year, equivalent to approximately £120,000 in avoided disposal costs.

In summary, it was stated that the service developments supported environmental targets, improved resident experience, strengthened compliance with new national simpler?recycling legislation, and enabled continued review of services to achieve further reductions in waste and operational efficiencies.

Members enquired whether lessons had been learned from lost commercial waste contracts and how much the Council was likely to spend on recovering outstanding debts. Officers explained that commercial waste debt recovery was often limited because business closures made it difficult to identify owners. It was stated that robust debt?recovery processes were followed, but in many cases, businesses left the area entirely, or owners could not be traced. Small debts were not pursued where recovery would cost more than the amount owed.

Councillors queried whether the collection of contaminated residential recycling waste would be reviewed, highlighting inefficiencies caused when bags were left behind and later needed separate collection. Officers reported that recycling education officers were deployed to properties with persistent contamination issues and undertook door?knocking and resident engagement. Education was prioritised before enforcement. It was confirmed that waste left for extended periods posed environmental, health, and street?cleansing issues and was therefore cleared where necessary.

The Chair referred to a previous performance report, noting the Committee’s interest in quantified contamination data. Officers stated that the data was not immediately available but would be provided at a later date. The Cabinet Member added that contamination issues were continually reviewed and that new waste?segregation legislation and the food?waste scheme would support improvements.

The Committee praised the Community Waste Day event in Charville and asked how locations were selected. It was confirmed that the scheme was a pilot selecting areas with high fly?tipping rates or strong resident demand. Positive feedback and high tonnage levels were noted. The Cabinet Member added that locations were in the south of the Borough, where fly?tipping was most prevalent, and that proximity to Harlington Road Depot was also a factor.

Councillors asked whether commercial waste services were being sufficiently advertised and whether additional bin sizes could be offered. Officers responded that further expansion could be considered, but larger containers required different vehicles. Officers highlighted ongoing work integrating waste?service sales with enforcement visits, where businesses without trade?waste agreements were offered Council services.

Councillors queried how businesses were being encouraged to reduce waste generation. In response, it was stated that legislation required businesses to segregate waste and that enforcement teams and sales staff promoted compliance.

Members asked whether soft?plastics recycling could be better supported by providing information on locations such as supermarkets. It was confirmed that national trials were ongoing and that website improvements, including locator links, would be explored.

The Committee sought further clarification as to whether issues with bag quality had been addressed and whether compensation was received from the supplier. It was confirmed that compensation had been agreed and that contractual issues were being resolved. With regard to the lifespan of compostable food?waste liners, it was explained that lifespan depended on storage conditions and could be up to 12 months in warm, dry environments. Clearer public guidance would be considered.

Councillors raised concerns about inconsistent collections, particularly around schools, and the increased interval between waste being piled and removed. Officers acknowledged the issues and stated that stronger management oversight was being introduced to reduce delays, prevent blocked pavements, and improve operational consistency.

Members queried whether operatives could report split bags so that street?cleansing teams could attend. Officers stated that closer working between the waste collection and street?cleansing teams was already taking place, ensuring that follow?up crews were deployed. Councillors requested that thanks be passed to the waste collection crews, which officers agreed to relay.

Councillors requested enforcement data regarding commercial waste and what challenges existed. It was reported that data was held in Power BI and that ASBET and waste services were working collaboratively. Repeat offenders were monitored, and first?time issues were approached through education.

The Committee enquired how private commercial operators’ waste?disposal practices were verified. It was explained that businesses were required to hold valid waste?carrier licences, which could be inspected by the Council.

In response to Members’ queries as to whether bin lorries could be wrapped to advertise Christmas collection changes, it was noted that wrapping had been used previously and was cheaper than bolted-on boards, though less flexible. Future exploration was possible.

Questions were also raised about selling advertising space. Officers explained that revenue in other boroughs had not met expectations, but opportunities to promote council initiatives were commonly used.

Concerns were raised by several Councillors that street sweepers were attending roads on incorrect days or ahead of refuse vehicles. It was confirmed that a review of sweeping rotas, including solo operatives, was underway to improve alignment with waste collection schedules. Councillors asked whether residents could be notified in advance so they could move vehicles. Officers responded that advance notification through flyers or online messaging was feasible in heavily parked areas.

A further question sought data on the number of solo sweepers; officers stated that a full review was needed to determine whether capacity was sufficient.

Members reported widespread misuse of litter bins for household waste and asked what action was being taken to tackle this. It was explained that a borough-wide litter?bin rationalisation exercise was planned. Bins that attracted persistent fly?tipping could be removed, though impacts on local amenity would be considered. Education and signposting to waste?disposal options would continue.

Councillors raised issues about fly?tipped waste in gullies and ditches that crews could not safely access. Officers confirmed that signage or notices could be introduced to inform residents that the Council was aware but awaiting specialist equipment or safe conditions. A grab lorry was available for certain cases, though health and safety risk assessments remained paramount.

The Committee enquired how usage and frequency of emptying litter bins were monitored. It was stated that part of the rationalisation project involved reviewing collection frequencies and staff observations. The Cabinet Member confirmed that the forthcoming Love Clean Streets app would support resident reporting and hotspot identification.

In response to Members’ questions as to whether discount schemes such as Hillingdon First could be applied to commercial waste, it was explained that the Council’s selling point was reliability rather than low cost, but flexible pricing models could be explored. The competitive London market made discounted initiatives challenging. The Cabinet Member added that removing votes from the public domain empowered officers to make commercial decisions and offer discretionary discounts where appropriate.

Councillors asked why the Council did not service Heathrow Airport commercially. Officers explained that the Council’s operations were geared toward small and medium enterprises, not large?scale waste producers requiring compactor bins, skips, and multiple daily collections. Opportunities could be explored but would require significant investment.

Members suggested that QR codes could be placed on bins to report fullness. In response officers highlighted cybersecurity risks involving cloned QR codes leading to fraudulent websites. Location?based labels or the new reporting app were considered safer alternatives.

Councillors sought further clarification as to what happened when dumped waste contained identifiable addresses. Officers stated that an address alone did not prove who dumped the waste. Investigations required further evidence and were conducted by the enforcement team.

The Chair recognised the Borough’s strong waste?collection service and thanked refuse crews. The Cabinet Member concluded by thanking the Committee for its questions, acknowledging ongoing challenges, and expressing commitment to continued improvements and collaboration with Councillors.

RESOLVED: That the Residents’ Services Select Committee noted the update in the report.