Residents' feedback was crucial to recycling plans

“A few very significant points. "Residents' views were paramount in considering changes to the scheme" writes Mr Kevin Pegg in his letter to 'Mailbox'. "The results of the consultation showed residents felt it was more important to reduce cost and CO2 within the service rather than the collection of glass".
"The two trials we carried out", he went on to state, "involved more than 4,000 households within the district and were very well received. Views on the trial were gathered from surveys sent to all residents who took part, which were returned by 46 per cent of households".

Approximately 400,000 households in the Blaby District Council area (information source,BDC) so appprox. 10 per cent of the total households in the District were involved ? 46 per cent of that 10 per cent it's said, responded to the survey. Was 100 per cent of 46 per cent in favour of change then ? Would certainly be remarkable and unusual if that was in fact the case.
From what I can see, it would appear that at best probably about 0.5 per cent of the total number of households in the District would be in favour of the change.
Councillor Mr Guy Jackson is reported to have said "This new scheme will not only make recycling easier for residents but save money and reduce the council's carbon footprint". How it will make recycling 'easier' I cannot imagine, perhaps someone will explain? That it will save the Council money I cannot argue with, but in reducing Council's carbon footprint it is simply transferring that to the increasing of residents' carbon footprint, resulting in increased carbon footprint overall !
When residents are provided with the new 240 litre recycling wheelie bin, presumably one at least of the existing bins will be being removed ? What will happen to the then redundant 400,000 bins falling out of use? There has to be a cost factor somewhere in this exercise that really is being hidden away.

With the best will in the world it will not be possible for my household to take our glass 'waste' to a bottle bank, so it will have to be suitably wrapped, as to not be a possible hazard for the people who collect the waste ( not easier to deal with but more demanding !) and ultimately will finish up as landfill.”

“The arguement is that the cost of return (to the Council) for the glass has reduced massively, therfore delivers less income

The arguement therefore is also that we dont care less if it goes to landfill or not but it would be nice if used the recycling bins around the District - as long as you can store, collate & deliver it yourself.

The Council & LM has missed one bit of news in their press releases though - the size of the new bin!

This will be a supersized 240 litre bin (compared to the usual 140 litre existing paper waste bin) - where the heck is this going to go at many houses?”

“Headline: "Residents' feedback was crucial to recycling plans"...


Between the lines: "Crucial to the recycling plan was the cost to the council, we've managed to reduce that cost by passing the responsibility for glass recycling to the householders of the borough"...”

“Kevin Pegg talks utter rubbish. How can stopping collecting glass from residents, thereby forcing them to to deal with it themselves at their own expense, be an improvement. As far as reducing CO2, I assume he thinks residents cars and the trucks that will have to empty the glass banks do not give out pollution.
Good news though, Blaby Council will save £200,000 so the council tax will come down next year!!!
As far as the environment is concerned, having tons more glass in landfill, is this environmentally friendly?
Where do they get these people from.
If Mr Pegg wants to improve the service and save the council money, he could quit and let someone do the job who does not talk rubbish!!”

“This new system will also make 3 crews redundant as the collection vehicles are halved. Feel sorry for those involved”