Residential recycling competition

What follows is the text of a memo that I have submitted to the Planning and Environment Committee, which I hope they will discuss at their next meeting in April:

Following an idea I had earlier this month and a subsequent meeting to discuss my proposal with Gemma Coles, the EDDC Waste Reduction Manager, I now would like to share my thoughts with the Committee.

In short, I am looking at ways to boost levels of residential recycling and to ensure that when recycling takes place, it is done correctly. At the moment, a number of residents may be recycling on a regular basis, but they may be discarding unsuitable items (leading to cross-contamination) or not compressing items sufficiently (causing the waste trucks to be carrying around large amounts of air, inhibiting them from reaching full capacity and maximising environmental efficiency).

As with most things in life, a carrot and stick approach can be the best method to change people’s behavioural patterns and to ensure that efficiency and productivity are placed at the forefront of operations. Accordingly, I think that the best way to encourage responsible, frequent and efficient residential recycling is to reward those residents who undertake such practices and to strongly encourage non-recyclers into adopting such positive policies.

The idea of a “Recycling Competition” is, therefore, my proposed solution.

Before outlining the details of my proposed competition, I want to draw the Committee’s attention to the fact that there are five residential collections per week in Wimborne Minster over a two-week period – that is, ten collection areas overall. Each residential property therefore has its recyclable waste collected twice in a calendar month.

I propose that every fortnight, one residential property is chosen as a winner if it complies with the following criteria:

• All waste within the green box is fully recyclable, according to EDDC guidelines;

• All waste within the green box is thoroughly washed (where applicable) to maximise its recyclable worth and to cut down on future processing;

• All waste within the green box is thoroughly compressed to maximise environmental efficiency and to save space abroad the collection vehicle;

• All waste within the green bag is fully recyclable, according to EDDC guidelines.

The winning property will then receive a substantial prize, valued at between £25 and £50, which would be considered as both a reasonable reward and as an incentive for others to recycle in the hope of winning a similar prize. These prizes will come from a variety of sources, which I outline further in this memo.

Gemma and I agree that such a competition would receive notable publicity from the local media – EDDC would be prepared to issue various press releases, in the hope of securing airtime on both local radio and television. Furthermore, EDDC would design and print leaflets and flyers to advertise the competition; Gemma and I also hope that this sort of initiative would do well via word of mouth, which should also boost community awareness and spirit.

Selection of Winning Residents
To ensure that the competition is fair and transparent, Gemma and I spent a considerable amount of our meeting discussing the best way to select winning residents. Although my original idea was to ask the recyclable waste collectors to choose which resident, in their opinion, had recycled the most (correct) waste, Gemma pointed out two fallibilities: EDDC is not trying to encourage more waste to be recycled, but for households to cut down on the waste that they produce (and, obviously, for the waste that is produced to be recycled), and that the waste collectors are running a very tight schedule as it is. For them to choose a winner would take up precious time, along with running the danger that certain residents may complain that they will never win because they perceive the waste collectors to be biased against them, especially if such residents had lodged complaints against the collecting agents in the past.

Accordingly, winning houses will be chosen at random by a computer that is searching the electoral register for the Wimborne area. On the prize-giving day, ten houses will be drawn at random using this technique, and the addresses passed to the collecting agents. Of those ten, the winning house will be the first that the collecting agents travel to that has recyclable waste that meets the criteria outlined on the first page of this document; they will work their way down the list until a winning house is found. If one of these houses is found not to offer any recycling that morning, or indeed to offer incorrect recycling, then a note will be made and Gemma will ask the EDDC marketing team to visit that house in person. The team will outline how that house just missed out on a substantial prize, and how the house could rectify its recycling habits to stand a chance of winning in the future.

Furthermore, Gemma pointed out that for the competition to be truly fair, we must not discriminate against the houses that have their recyclable waste collected on a certain day. Therefore, we have decided to issue prizes on each day of the collection schedule – that is, ten different collection days per month (Monday to Friday over two separate weeks, meaning that each house has their recyclable waste collected once every fortnight).

Below, I have broken into down into simple terms, where the days of the month are shown and the number next to the day signifies the area code (i.e. there are ten areas in the Wimborne area, each containing a similar number of houses and it is by these areas that the collection days are allocated).

[TABLE]

In the first month, 01 and 02 would be the areas in which the prizes would be awarded (01 on Monday the 1st, 02 on Tuesday the 16th, following the fortnightly schedule). In the second month, 03 and 04 would be the areas in which the prizes would be awarded (03 on Wednesday the 3rd, 04 on Thursday the 18th), which would again follow the fortnightly schedule. This pattern would be repeated until 20 weeks had elapsed and all 10 areas had been awarded prizes; the sequence would then restart.

As one prize will be awarded every fortnight, it will take 20 weeks (four months) for the entire collection cycle to be exhausted and for the process to start again; to put it in layman’s terms, there would be, on average, just over two opportunities per year for a house in one of the ten different collection areas to win one of these prizes. Indeed, based on these figures, we would need to arrange 26 prizes for the competition to run for a full year.

Source of Prizes
I will be contacting a number of local businesses – around a dozen or so to begin with – seeking to secure their cooperation; these businesses will range from larger stores such as Somerfield and WHSmith to local restaurants, and from smaller shops to other service providers. I will ask some for vouchers, offering fairly substantial discounts on services, and request cash remuneration prizes from others; indeed, given the current economic climate and media narrative, the thought of receiving 50% off your family’s weekly shop at Somerfield might be extremely galvanising. Businesses in the area will benefit from the substantial levels of publicity surrounding the competition – they will be actively seen as community sponsors and champions, especially after the photo opportunity as they hand a substantial prize to a winning resident.

It is my aim that those residents who win prizes from the competition will be tempted to maintain their relationship with the business that awarded them their prize, as a bond of perceived goodwill and loyalty will have been established. This should help smaller local businesses in Wimborne to attract and retain first-time custom, especially as the competition winners are very likely to broadcast details of their prize to friends and family, thus increasing the spread of this goodwill and brand loyalty.

Furthermore, I intend to liaise with Commercial Recycling Limited, as I wish to have them onboard as a sponsor and as a contributor to the prize fund. CRL has been very good in recent months when working with me on the WMTC Business Recycling Initiative, and they have shown interest in being community minded – their support for a mixed-recycling bin in the Town Square went above and beyond the call of duty as they were prepared to finance and support the project without additional support.

I hope that CRL would be willing to donate a one-off cash prize and, also, to offer a further prize of a substantial discount on their business recycling service to another winning resident – say, 25% off of a yearly contract. After all, I am sure that one of the winning residents will own or operate a local business (such is the high number of businesses in the Wimborne area), so they could transfer their residential recycling prize to the business side of environmental responsibility. Indeed, some winning residents may decide that the donating of their prize to a friend or family member with a local business may be more rewarding to them; if this was the case, Gemma and I feel that this kind of charity would boost community spirit and ensure that business recycling continued to improve in the Wimborne area.

Launch of Competition
Gemma and I intend for the competition to commence in the middle of July, leaving us some four months to prepare. Between now and then I aim to contact the first 12 local businesses to secure their support and relevant prizes, so the competition will have enough momentum to run for its first 6 months. Afterwards, once the publicity has started to snowball and the scheme is regarded as a success, I hope that other businesses will either be more easily convinced to come onboard or, ideally, they will be the ones initiating the contact!


In summary, it is my ambition that this recycling competition will create a sense of excitement across the town, due to the scheme’s extensive publicity that EDDC hopes to create, which will cause a substantial number of residents to adopt proper and regular recycling habits, maybe for the first time. In turn, the structure of this competition would have several positive effects for local businesses in Wimborne, ranging from the generation of quality publicity to bonds of goodwill and loyalty that will be established between residents and businesses.

Indeed, I also hope that the WMTC Business Recycling Initiative will benefit, as both this competition and that initiative fall under the same environmental umbrella and can, therefore, work alongside each other. Finally, if a large number of residents permanently amend their recycling habits in the name of this competition, EDDC will save money in the long-term and the environment will, obviously, be the greatest beneficiary.

American toys, Chinese plastics and the mounds of rubbish that might result in Wimborne

This morning I had a very interesting meeting with Jeremy Carpenter of Commercial Recycling Limited. When I asked how our joint business recycling initiative was progressing at his end, he first told me a very interesting story.

As the world economy teeters on the edge of recession and as we Britons are already feeling the sharp teeth of our own credit crunch, there is an unexpected by-product for residents in Wimborne and East Dorset, and it goes something like this: with the American economy stalling and confidence thus faltering, a majority of Americans are reigning in their spending habits. Consequently, American purchases of toys and other plastic-related goods are down by considerable margins. The main manufacturer of such toys and plastic goods is China, whose plastics industry apparently relies on the Americans as they have the largest purchasing power. With little custom from the Americans, the Chinese are cutting their plastic manufacturing to a very low level. And - this is where we Wimborne residents come in - which country provides China with the raw materials to manufacture such plastic goods?

We do.

Yes, a significant proportion of our general waste - including plastics and cardboards - is collected from kerbsides before being processed at recycling plants. Then, said materials are shunted into shipping containers and sent across the high seas to China.

China pays us for these raw materials, America pays China for these newly-created toys and American children reward parents with a brief restbite from their tantrums. Or so it was. Now, without the Americans to buy the toys and without the Chinese to buy our plastic waste, mountains of recycled waste could, theoretically, build up in the UK. An interesting doomsday scenario, to say the least!

Jeremy did go on to elaborate, however, that local firms were working hard in East Dorset to propose solutions and to reinvest this waste into the local community. I asked whether CRL was still collecting and recycling the same amount of waste from Wimborne-based customers, or whether the recession had caused some businesses to lose their nerve. Pleasingly, Jeremy told me that CRL was holding their prices (at a level lower than general waste disposal, I might add), which had allowed them to retain their existing customers - and to keep collecting over 1,500kg of recyclable waste per week from businesses in the Wimborne area.

Indeed, as part of this joint initiative, CRL and I are always looking at ways to guarantee that business recycling not only saves money for businesses (thus making them more competitive whilst simultaneously boosting the local economy), but also ensures that this recycled waste can be put to good use in the local community: be it through increasing alternative energy use (such as composting and biofuels), promoting its use in construction work (such as sculpting golf courses) or by offering these materials to local manufacturers for reuse.

As the economy gradually improves towards the end of 2009 (or so I hope), I intend to expand the initiative to sign up new businesses. Our main selling point will be simple: if the cost of recycling has stayed consistent during a bleak recession, we can guarantee the same value for money when our collective waistbands are loosened as things improve. Furthermore, as the cost of disposing waste in landfill will increase by another 50% over the next three years, recycling will become even better value for money - and, obviously, it will remain a vital tool in the fight to protect our local environment.

At the same time, a gradual economic recovery will allow American parents to resume their toy-buying habits, and thus ensure that the Chinese will reopen their ports to our mountains of recycled waste!

Local transport plan for Dorset, 2006-2011

In response to the progress report and midterm review that was distributed by Dorset County Council (DCC) in October 2008, I have outlined my linear observations below, arranged by page number. Please note that these page numbers refer to the PDF file and not to the numbers printed at the bottom of each page.

As a more general note, I know that some Members may question my decision to analyse a document such as this, which makes no reference to South East Dorset and thus no reference to Wimborne Minster. However, as many of our residents frequently use the transport corridors across the rest of the county – and as it is always important to grasp fully the neighbouring infrastructure so we can try to implement in Wimborne Minster what has, elsewhere, had a proven record of success and reject what appears to have been a failure – I think it should make interesting food for thought. Furthermore, some of the questions that I pose in this memo relate to more generalised areas of transport policy that could, regardless of the specifics, apply to our current networks and methods of implementation in Wimborne Minster.

I look forward to reading DCC’s response to this memo and I hope the Committee will take the time to digest my thoughts, offering constructive criticism and feedback where it feels it is necessary to do so.


Page 05 of 98:
• Ref: “Should we re focus LTP expenditure on road safety away from individual improvements to a more holistic approach that encompasses better enforcement and improved driver education along key priority routes? It would mean that long running requests for some junction improvements would be abandoned or postponed?”

Improved driver education is something that mainly originates from central government amendments to driving regulations and the subsequent raising of standards by the DVLA and DSA for driving tests in the UK. I imagine it would therefore be quite difficult for a county council to have a palpable impact on the improvement of driver education, unless DCC regards targeted safety campaigns, applications to introduce more (free?) driver awareness schemes and the possible modification of road signage as positive training grounds for such an improvement?

I would caution the Council on issuing such a blanket ban on needed junction improvements, especially if they are “long-running requests”. Certainly, there are areas in Dorset that would see safety benefits from infrastructural upgrades.

A better strategy would be one of finely balancing the need for the kind of enforcement that has direct safety benefits – and not just financial benefits for the Council – with the need for improved driving standards, in some cases, and the continuing of infrastructural upgrades in the most urgent areas of the county.


Page 06 of 98:
• Ref: “Should LTP funds continue to be used to expand the coverage of demand responsive and other innovative bus services in rural areas, supplemented where appropriate for support for more locally based and community based schemes such as community car schemes or car clubs?”

It probably goes without saying that yes, the Council should most definitely respond to any requests to expand the coverage of demand responsive bus services – if it didn’t, I don’t see how DCC could justify retaining the service’s tag of “demand responsive”, unless the Council enjoys promoting the use of irony.

If such an expansion was needed and thus implemented, it would be prudent to examine other areas of the public transport network that could be downsized if at all necessary, or at least made to be more cost effective. It is always healthy to conduct regular audits to ensure that the great black hole of bureaucracy isn’t partly choking the effectiveness of a public service. On another note, there is a good chance that the introduction of a community car service or the creation of car clubs would foster a greater community spirit and self-empower some residents by enabling them to create effective, individually-tailored solutions to transport problems in Dorset. It is worth noting, however, that any limitation on the number of transport services provided by DCC – in response to any rise in privately-provided alternatives – may lead to complaints in the future if levels of transport-related council tax remain the same.

• Ref: “Whilst there is currently a balanced approach to provision of cycling infrastructure, should we direct more of our LTP expenditure on cycling infrastructure in our urban and suburban areas to encourage cycling to work, school and shops – at the expense of more leisure based schemes in rural areas?”

Before such a redirection is undertaken, it would be prudent to conduct a study on the likelihood of residents cycling to work, school and the shops. Such a study should be counterweighted with (presumed) existing figures on the number of residents who actually cycle in this manner, to produce an accurate overall picture of predicted cyclists for the next few years. If it is found that there is little interest shown by residents in leisure-related urban cycling, surely it would be more beneficial to channel the ring fenced funds for cycling to safety-related areas such as Safer Routes to School or in-demand programmes in the rural areas?

• Ref: “Should the County Council use LTP capital funds to encourage more innovation (such as more demand responsive services in urban areas) and new operators in the provision of local bus services?”

If all requests for LTP capital funding could be placed side-by-side in one document, it would be far easier to assess each claim’s merits and overarching importance. With regard to this question, it would seem logical to respond to consumer demand through demand responsive services that are keenly tuned to such needs, but any funding for new operators should be considered carefully. The ability to “back-fill” gaps in provision may exist, but if the operators are cancelling the routes that DCC wishes to back-fill, I would point out that, in all likelihood, these operators are only cancelling routes after responding to the will of the market. If there is no demand for a service, it should not be supplied as it then ceases to be cost-effective – if the operators realise this, I doubt it would be sensible for DCC to back-fill these unpopular routes, especially if such a back-fill would only come at a substantial expense to the ratepayer.

However, a footnote is important here: any residents left isolated by the abolition of unpopular routes (in relative, area-related terms) should be caught by a DCC-led safety net. The installation of other methods of transport, such as an aforementioned community car service or perhaps even the creation of a special DCC bus a number of times a week, would afford isolated residents the same opportunities for mobility that are enjoyed by those residing in areas which are considered to be “in-demand” by the market.


Page 07 of 98:
• Ref: “Should the Highway Authorities in Dorset use Local Transport Plan and other funds to implement a network control centre prior to 2012, with a view to managing traffic levels better and to provide long term improvements in journey times and congestion levels and provide better real time information to the motorist?”

Attempting to establish a thorough and effective network control centre before 2012 seems entirely logical – after all, it would be best to have a new, complex system well integrated into the local transport network before the 2012 Olympics begin and Dorset becomes a site of pilgrimage for many Olympic fans.

Furthermore, it has been said that over the past few years the amount of traffic congestion has increased. This problem may not stem from a lack of “real time information to the motorist”, but rather from an overdependency on the car, from junctions which do not allow for the most effective flow of traffic (especially at peak times) and from roadworks which are too frequent and, therefore, too disruptive.

Would it not make more sense to invest in more demand-responsive bus services, to ensure that local cycle routes are well constructed, well maintained and well publicised, and to examine areas of Dorset that would benefit from junction upgrades and the curtailing of endless small roadworks that do little actually to improve the traffic flow?

• Ref: “Should additional Local Transport Plan funds be used to assist the Borough and District Councils in their monitoring of air quality levels, in order to improve our understanding of the problems?”

Perhaps DEFRA would be a better source of such funding, especially as the Council is being asked to follow guidelines set by central government.


Page 08 of 98:
• Ref: “Should the County Council adopt a more radical, but environmentally sensitive approach to traffic management in sensitive areas by reducing the number of signs and lines?”

I hardly think that reducing the number of signs or lines could be considered “radical”, although more radical solutions do need to be found to combat the threats from air and noise pollution, and from certain roadways that may be affecting the biodiversity of certain areas within Dorset. A traffic infrastructure should be sympathetic to its local environment, balancing the needs for effective transport with environmental considerations.

Perhaps there are areas of the county where DCC could strengthen this harmony through more sensitive future development, a reassessment of HGV routes, dialogue with satellite navigation developers to ensure that their routes are not sending large volumes of traffic through sensitive areas, and the evaluation of traffic volume data to understand the exact areas where roadways and junctions need to be at their most effective, and where they should be the most maintained to boost not only their own quality but also the quality of the local environment.

• Ref: “Should LTP funds be refocused to meeting national climate change targets, possibly at the expense of solving existing problems and meeting local targets?”

This question is better phrased than those which precede it in the report – when asking whether funds should be refocused on meeting climate change targets, it offers an indication of the other areas of the transport network that may suffer as a result. Perhaps the authors of the report’s final draft would be willing to offer more of this kind of perspective when posing questions related to funding.

On the subject of climate change, I would err on the side of caution and argue that existing problems and the meeting of local targets should be given more consideration. The creed that climate change is largely caused by humans is, in my opinion, an overexaggeration on the part of our national media and therefore I do not think it is wise to follow down a path of increased climate change funding without adequate statistics. Yes, climate change does exist, but it has done for millennia and I am not convinced that our own actions are having a sizeable effect on what could be a very natural process. With this in mind, we should be aware of its negative effects and thus ensure that we, through entirely cost-effective means, are as carbon neutral as possible, whilst also realising that the resolution of existing transport problems is still important – and so is the meeting of local targets. After all, we know for certain that man can have a palpable effect on the condition of our local transport infrastructure; funding is essential to make this happen.


Page 09 of 98:
• Ref: “Should the authority be moving away from a vision based on major improvements to a vision based on controlling or better managing the demand for transport?”

It would make more sense to ensure that existing infrastructure is being operated to its full potential, as well as listening to complaints from residents about certain areas of Dorset where the design or implementation of traffic management is failing. It may be true to say that if DCC was able to better manage existing demands for transport across the county, then this would be considered a major improvement by many residents.

I would like to point out one exception, however: I think it would be prudent for DCC to commission a study, working with the relevant district councils and MPs’ offices, on the viability of evolving the single-carriageway A31 into a modern dual-carriageway that could cope with the increased demand sometimes bestowed upon it by those wishing to travel between Wimborne Minster and Dorchester (and onto the likes of Exeter in Devon).

• Ref: “Should we work with Bournemouth and Poole to produce one Local Transport Plan for the whole of ‘Greater Dorset’?”

This may encourage more of the fabled “joined-up thinking” that can, at times, boost productivity and effectiveness. If such a strategy were implemented, would it cut costs for all the councils involved, as well as allowing for the creation of a more cohesive and equally-detailed transport plan? It is important to note that Bournemouth, Poole and the surrounding South East Dorset area all have their fair share of transport-related problems already, so it would be vital to ensure that each part of the county was given fair study.


Page 16 of 98: [cf. Pages 79-83]
• Ref: “1.17 Of the 19 core LTP or LAA targets relevant to Dorset, only 8 are on track and 8 are not, whilst the remaining 3 have no clear evidence. However, in many cases, as has been explained in previous reports there are some concerns over the quality of recorded data or of the systems in use to record that data.”

Looking through Appendix A of this draft report (commencing on page 79), where these 19 core LTP and LAA targets are detailed, it is appears that moderate progress is being made. However, I do have concerns over both the quality of the recorded data and the criteria by which this information is collected:

- What defines a person as being seriously injured?
- Are these KSI figures obtained directly from hospitals and/or the Police?
- Is there any middle ground between a “slight casualty” and someone who is seriously injured – and if so, does that middle ground have its own target?
- What defines a driver-training course? Does this figure include those who are compelled to enrol on such a course due to committing such offences as speeding, dangerous driving, etc.?
- “Satisfaction with local bus services” – is this ascertained exclusively through the distribution of surveys that are scientifically-sound?
- “The number of cycle trips as measured at 10 key monitoring sites over a three-week period. Converted to annualised index.” – what if this data was collected at a time of year that discouraged cycling due to weather conditions?
- “Average Journey Time per mile during the morning peak… New target set to maintain the existing average journey time per mile along the Weymouth to Dorchester Corridor for the next 3 years.” – will this data not be redundant when applied to the rest of Dorset?
- “The percentage of pupils travelling to school by car… To maintain the number of pupils taken to school by car at a countrywide average of 31.5% in 2007.” – this information is based on a Dfes School Census, but how is DCC attempting to intervene in parents’ arrangements to maintain this level? And is the ultimate goal to decrease dependency on car travel?

In addition, I am concerned that the mandatory targets set for the condition of principal A roads, non-principal B and C roads (all of the aforementioned judged by percentage of those overdue for treatment) and footways (judged by percentage of those where structural maintenance should be considered) are all not on track. This is a common complaint told to me by residents.


Page 32 of 98:
• Ref: “4.16 As a result of the termination of its funding (it was originally funded through the Countryside Agency), the formal decision was taken by DART at the end of 2007 to dissolve the partnership. In the interim, any remaining DART projects were passed over to Dorset Community Action (DCA) to progress. Many of the organisations originally involved in DART have now been incorporated into the new Dorset Strategic Partnership (DSP) “Accessibility” theme group.”

Since the loss of the Dorset Accessible and Responsive Transport scheme, has there been a decline in the amount of services offered to residents? The draft report states that “many” of DART’s organisations have been consolidated into the DSP, but that suggests some have been lost. Is DCC confident that the aims and initial success of the DART scheme, now under the auspices of the DSP and Dorset Community Action (DCA), are being actively sustained and even built upon?


Page 33 of 98:
• Ref: “4.26 In 2008/09 the Council has invested £1m capital in the first batch of replacement fleet vehicles, a further £1m will be invested next year. With effect from 1 October 2008 the Council has taken control of a major new depot facility. It will also receive substantial capital investment in the current financial year.”

Has DCC invested in replacement fleet vehicles that are equipped with modern, environmentally-friendly technology? If not, in future it would make sense for the Council to purchase vehicles that are carbon neutral. I’m sure some of this draft report’s aims – particularly relating to air quality – could be achieved, in part, if such an example were set by the local lead authority.


Page 41 of 98:
• Ref: “5.8 Although there is some evidence that there is some reduction in car use when School Travel Plans are implemented, car use rates on both rural and urban school runs continued to rise during the first Local Transport Plan period resulting in a less stringent target being set to maintain the existing levels in car use during the second LTP period. However after the first period of DfT monitoring through the annual school census, there has been a 0.4% fall in car use on the school run compared with previous year.”

As I asked of DCC earlier in this memo, how does the Council hope to decrease dependency on the car during school runs? And whilst it is pleasing to hear that a fall of car usage has been recorded, a 0.4% fall is hardly newsworthy. What plans does DCC have to ensure this decrease is performed quickly and comprehensively?


Page 47 of 98:
• Ref: “Currently we are monitoring heavy goods vehicle movements from Poole Port to the north of the county using temporary cameras to gauge the use of inappropriate routes.”

As written earlier in this memo, there may be evidence to suggest that satellite navigation developers are directing HGV traffic along unsuitable routes, which leads to congestion and small town infrastructural damage. Hopefully this HGV monitoring will afford the Council the chance to discover where these anomalies arise, and for the Council then to inform the commercial developers of these errors.


Page 50 of 98:
• Ref: “5.49 The Carsharedorset scheme has seen a significant increase in membership levels in recent months, largely due to the rapid rise in fuel prices. There are currently over 2500 members registered on the countywide car sharing website, of which 36% have found a matched journey. Statistics show that Carsharedorset members are saving over a million miles a year and saving more than £100,000 per year (usually spent on fuel, parking, and general running costs). Car sharers are also saving 350 tonnes in CO2 emissions which equates to saving more than 100,000 trees per year.”

What is the average distance travelled per journey as part of this scheme? Are commuters on weekdays the main users? Furthermore, what plans does DCC have to expand Carsharedorset’s outreach? I would suspect that, at present, a lot of drivers still do not know of its existence or fully understand how it’s implemented.


Page 67 of 98:
• Ref: “8.16 Both the operational airport and the employment land are currently accessed via the B3073 Parley Lane, a single carriageway road which currently operates close to capacity. Traffic levels recorded in 2005 indicate a 24 hr Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) flow of 20,000. A number of on-line improvements are proposed, but these will not meet the future access requirements for both the operational airport and the employment zone. It is therefore essential to implement a direct link between the airport and the A338 Bournemouth Spur Road. Work has been undertaken by Dorset County Council to establish the feasibility of a direct link road between the airport and the A338. It is important to establish whether such a link is practicable within current ecological constraints. The work has identified a number of options that could be implemented without unacceptable environmental consequences.”

The expansion of Bournemouth Airport is a contentious issue, but regardless of my opinion on the subject, it is clear that even the existing traffic infrastructure in that area is close to breaking point. Referring to this DCC feasibility study on a direct link between the airport and the A338, could someone elaborate as to what environmental consequences have been theorised? These consequences may not be “unacceptable” according to the draft report authors’ terminology, but how is this defined in real, ecological terms?


Overall, this draft report provides an involving overview of the Dorset transport network, although some questions remain and the need for greater detail applies to certain areas of the document.

This text will be presented, in a memo dated 10th November 2008, to a future meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee.

Waste management strategy

I have read Dorset County Council’s draft waste management strategy with interest. Overall, it appears to be a well-researched and thorough document that acknowledges the importance of good waste management. Not only does such management have tangible environmental benefits, but it should also foster greater respect for our communities and prove to be more economically viable than pursuing the current indecisive strategy that emphasises disposal to landfill as much as more green-friendly alternatives.

However, there are a few points that I wish to draw the Committee’s attention to. Firstly, referring to page 5 of the draft strategy report, I am slightly sceptical as to why climate change impacts are given a 5.3% weighting when meeting waste management targets and minimising biodegradable sent to landfill are both weighted at just 4.2%. Indeed, minimising residue to landfill is also under-weighted, in my view, at just 3.7%. Surely it is apparent to most environmentally-aware individuals that climate change is an effect, and such an effect can be sidelined – to a certain extent, at least – by increasing recycling and minimising landfill disposal. Recycling has a direct impact on reducing deforestation and on reducing harmful gases and other by-products that are produced by conventional landfill disposal techniques; climate change can thus be slowed.

Meanwhile, I agree that renewable energy sources should be more actively researched and implemented. Current world events show that oil dependency is even riskier than it was at the turn of the decade and the oil weapon remains a powerful tool for those states which possess it. Perhaps DCC would be willing to invest more in hydropower, windpower and electric power in an attempt to offset the negative effects caused by landfill deposit, as well as setting an example of how clean energy can be successfully introduced to a community. The economic and political benefits would also be obvious.

Dealing with waste locally, weighted at some 4.2% in the report, is also an important topic. Such local management allows our Dorset-based manufacturers to make use of the products made from recycled materials, which enables them to cut costs in terms of transportation and indeed the potentially greater cost of sourcing new, never-recycled materials.

On balance, I am of the opinion that our kerbside recycling scheme is good but has plenty of room for improvement. In East Dorset we should be offered a greater range of service – particularly in terms of plastics, magazines, cardboard and garden waste. At present, in Wimborne Minster at least, most plastic containers (excluding bottles) tend to be rejected. No cardboard is currently collected for recycling and neither is garden waste. A brown bag scheme – with expanded green bag credentials for cardboard, magazines and plastics – would see marked improvements in our recycling efforts.

Obviously, more finance may be needed to fund an increased awareness drive for Dorset’s residents. Radio spots and eye-catching, concise print advertisements would go some way to highlight the need for better waste management from all residents and businesses.

On a separate point (and perhaps it is an anti-populist view, at least for now), I am firmly of the belief that financial penalties should be meted out to those who fail to recycle from home and/or from their business. The best way to encourage more responsible and more wide-ranging waste management is to employ a stronger carrot-and-stick approach: reward those who do recycle with non-existent waste bills, and punish those who don’t with fines. One way to implement such a scheme would be by the “chips in bins” method: whilst some Bournemouth borough councillors have given this method an unfair reputation by comparing it to some Orwellian device, in reality it is harmless and relatively simple. Place chips in each resident’s general waste and recycling bins, which carry simple identifying information as to the owner of said bins. No other personal details are stored, nor do the waste collectors make a record of what waste is created by any given individual. Instead, the bins are weighed at the kerbside and charges are simply allocated to each resident.

Sensible charges, in my view, would include financial penalties for those who throw out more than one sack’s worth of general waste per week (unless there are a large number of occupants in the property and then a larger allowance should be afforded). No penalties will be incurred for those who place recyclable waste in their recycling bins, no matter the quantity. To avoid some residents’ inevitable attempts to dodge the charges, kerbside collectors are to check that the recyclable bin only contains recyclable waste. Any non-recyclable waste found in the recyclable bins should not be collected and instead placed in the general waste bins.

Some may claim that this would lead to an increase in fly tipping, but it is more likely that most residents would instead embrace the underlying purpose of the scheme and attempt to amend their waste habits. Furthermore, the efforts involved in frequently transferring waste to cars and then driving it to an anonymous fly tipping location may prove to be too much of an inconvenience.

In addition, I would also encourage both Dorset County Council and, locally, East Dorset District Council to work more closely with local businesses to ensure they are making the most out of commercial recycling facilities. Too few businesses, when compared to residents, are engaged in good environmental practices. Furthermore, as well as being strict on residents who do not recycle, I suggest that both central government and our local authorities attempt to launch an initiative whereby manufacturers are compelled to produce packaging of a smaller volume and of a better quality. The cost of these better quality materials would be offset by the smaller amount of packaging used by the same manufacturers. If this were to happen, consumers would have less of a burden placed upon them to dispose of this waste.

In summary, the DCC report has laid out some good themes for improvement. More detail is needed and, whilst wishing to be practical and not too idealistic, more creative thinking may make the difference between a good short-term waste management strategy and one that is a trailblazer for all other local authorities across the UK.

This text was presented, in a memo dated 19th August 2008, to a meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee on 6th October 2008.

Wimborne pleased to be awarded Quality Council Status

As recognition for our years of collective hard work and success, Wimborne Minster Town Council has been awarded Quality Council Status.

Tributes must not just be paid to my fellow councillors, but also to our Town Clerk, Mr Laurence Hewitt, whose tireless commitment to his job of overseeing all council operations has not just boosted our own performance but has directly led to public service improvements across the town.

Laurence has been with our council for approaching a decade and his list of achievements is now all the more stronger for turning us into a Quality Council.

Let us now hope that we can use the QCS as a real springboard to serving the people of Wimborne with better services, more active representation and less economic waste.

CCTV expansion for Leigh Road?

Earlier this week I received an email from a Leigh Road resident, Mr S.L., who was very concerned at the consistent level of vandalism to his property, allegedly perpetrated by drunkards on Friday and Saturday nights. He asked me if there were any plans to expand the CCTV system to include the periphery roads – and if so, whether Leigh Road would be included in any expansion, especially since it is such a major thoroughfare.

As a Leigh Road resident myself, I am aware of the large number of people who use Leigh Road on their way home from a night out in Wimborne. I also agree with Mr S.L. that a significant proportion of these people are drunk and some are rowdy. Most seem to walk along Leigh Road between the hours of midnight and two in the morning.

Whilst I am aware that I do not sit on the Resources Committee, I would still suggest that the Committee investigates these claims of vandalism and explores the feasibility of expanding the system to protect residents and their property. I recommend that a study be undertaken, with the support of Dorset Police, to ascertain if other Leigh Road residents (and those who live on the side roads) have reported similar claims of vandalism at the weekends. If so, it would be apparent that some action to resolve these problems was necessary. Mr S.L. also questions whether the pubs should contribute funding to CCTV.

In my opinion, the CCTV system has made massive inroads in improving community safety and security in the Town Centre; there is no reason why these benefits could not be devolved to other areas of Wimborne, if required. Furthermore, as the Police now possess the power to order an individual to follow a specific route home (and to monitor them at the CCTV Control Centre as they travel the required route), it seems unfortunate that there is such a long blind spot along Leigh Road.

Collectively, we have a moral duty to our ratepayers to ensure that their money is spent responsibly. Whilst I understand that any expansion to the CCTV system would incur a significant cost, I feel that the community benefits would outweigh the financial outlay – provided that the Committee is satisfied that this problem of vandalism is not just an isolated incident. On a more cynical note, some may later question our decision only to cover the Town Centre should a crime occur along a major road in Wimborne that was not covered by the CCTV system; none of us want the Council’s reputation to be sullied.

Visit to the CCTV Control Centre

On Friday the Town Council was invited to attend Wimborne Police Station (not to answer bail, before you ask) so that Members could reexamine the town's CCTV system. These cameras have been in place since the Council's 2003-07 term and they have allowed us to make massive inroads in improving community safety and security. In recent months the Police had requested that the system be upgraded in certain areas, to improve their viability, which the Resources Committee was happy to do.

During our visit, therefore, the six Members who attended saw the upgraded system in action and it certainly appeared to be impressive. The cameras are actively leading the fight against antisocial behaviour and theft, which are two of the main crime-related problems in Wimborne Minster.

However, it is not the CCTV system alone that deserves the credit. The majority of the accolades should go to the camera supervisors that are the eyes and ears of the system: Joe West and his team of loyal volunteers who regularly donate their time in service to our town. You will find Joe and his team in the Police Station each day, and they are there for very long hours throughout the night on each weekend. Their kindness is often overlooked as many are not aware of their service. I think all of the Police staff in Wimborne would agree with me that they are the heart and soul of the system and, indeed, they have a good rapport with officers on the ground. Let me also take this opportunity to personally thank Sgt Alan Setchell for his continued hard work and successful strategy in improving community safety across Wimborne Minster and the surrounding areas.

Boosting Town Business

It is increasingly apparent that certain traders and businesses in Wimborne Minster are struggling both from the perceived effects of the global “credit crunch” and two prominent local factors: the closure of Canford Bridge and the recent rise in car parking charges.

In an effort to boost town business, I suggest we try to think more creatively. Recently I read that the Chamber of Trade had designed and distributed a number of stickers that can be displayed in people’s cars and homes, proudly stating how that individual shops in Wimborne. Obviously this will not solve the problem entirely, but it may well have a small impact when acting as a reminder that our town is very much still alive and open for trading.

So, in addition to this sort of initiative, I propose we think of similar small-scale projects that could increase awareness, boost footfall and, in turn, improve the local economy. A series of mini-campaigns spearheaded by Wimborne Minster Town Council, sponsored by the Chamber of Trade and perhaps a small number of individual traders, could certainly improve local business.

We need to think of unique ways in which we can “educate” both Wimborne residents and those from out of town about our extensive selection of shops and related businesses. After all, I think that the quality and variety of our businesses is strong enough – we just need more people to realise that they exist and that they can offer goods and services which many chains and supermarkets cannot.

To begin with, in an attempt to draw in business and then to retain that custom, I am wondering whether a voucher scheme would be viable. Individual traders could run loyalty programmes whereby consumers are rewarded for their purchases through a points-based system – and if they achieve a pre-determined level of points, they are eligible for a discount on a future purchase. Obviously, in this current climate of ever-tightening purse strings, such a discount scheme would be well received by Wimborne’s residents and it may just convince them to make the town their primary place for shopping as opposed to the larger, out of town supermarkets.

In fact, certain traders may find it economically and ideologically beneficial to band together under this voucher scheme, so a purchase in one DIY store, for example, could generate points that would be valid in a similarly themed shop elsewhere in Wimborne (and vice versa). Cooperation with the local press could also yield a scenario whereby discount coupons are printed in their publications for use in a variety of shops.

To further boost awareness, an annual expo of our shops and businesses may help to generate sufficient word of mouth. Much like the Folk Festival is very effective at increasing awareness of Wimborne’s local musicians and related townsfolk, an annual event where businesses and shops are able to showcase their goods and services may draw in some larger crowds if it was publicised in advance, and if special offers were included as part of the expo. Repeat business could thus be secured for throughout the normal financial year.

Furthermore, in order to best celebrate the quality of our local businesses – to back up our rhetoric with substance, shall we say – we could devise and implement a scheme whereby the Town Council (or, indeed, the District Council) bestowed awards on the best businesses, restaurants and traders in a variety of pre-determined categories. These winning traders could then display the relevant award logo on their correspondence or fascia and, with a bit of luck, more residents would therefore be willing to try their services – perhaps for the first time.

Clearly, this awards scheme would only gain sufficient exposure and traction if the local press was willing to participate, and perhaps other institutions like the Town Guide and the District Council. There would also be a benefit to be found from broadcasting such award winners to neighbouring towns such as Ferndown, Christchurch, Poole and Bournemouth in an attempt to woo more out-of-towners into Wimborne, especially at a time when traders are suffering from the bridge closure and related “crunches”.

In summary, I hope to work with my fellow Members and with other local organisations to devise strategies that could, at no cost to the Town Council, give traders that little bit of extra business which they so crave.

Scotland should not compete separately at London 2012

Earlier today I read that the Scottish "Government" - i.e. the devolved SNP-led Scottish Executive - wants Scotland to have its own Olympic team at the 2012 Games.

I wonder what the British soldiers of the 20th century's wars - and, indeed, our soldiers from this decade's conflicts - would think of the Union fragmented. They gave their lives in defence of the Union, in all that was British - and now it is the theatre of the Olympic Games that might undo all of their sacrifice. I do not doubt that if Scotland competes as a separate nation in 2012 then our country will be broken up once and for all in the near future.

Those soldiers were proud to be British and so are many other citizens today. Let us remember that the SNP is the one leading these calls - a party with no majority at Holyrood. They are but a minority administration that promises everything but, as many realists acknowledge, they are massively shortsighted. An independent Scotland would not be the beacon of light that they claim; it relies on other countries in the Union to secure its successes, much like England relies on Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to secure its own successes, and so on. We must not let this empty rhetoric drive a wedge between 300 years of history and collective achievement.

Business Recycling update

Residents may be aware that my business recycling initiative was launched in the summer of 2007 with the modest support of a small recycling firm, Karbie Recycling. Earlier this year I began negotiations with Commercial Recycling Limited, which is a far bigger firm and therefore capable of a higher output in the future.

The principles of the scheme, meanwhile, remain the same: encouraging more businesses in Wimborne Minster to be environmentally friendly by recycling up to 75% of their waste – including paper, cardboard, plastic, tin and glass. Recycling is increasingly cheaper than simply depositing waste in landfill; these financial benefits should help businesses in what is becoming an ever-gloomier economic climate.

In June, a mail shot was sent to 420 businesses in and around Wimborne Minster, which contained both a flyer from Commercial Recycling Limited that advertised the benefits of their services and a covering letter from me.

A number of businesses took up our offer and signed up to Commercial Recycling Limited off the back of this initiative. However, many businesses and organisations, including the Town Hall, are locked in to existing waste management contracts – they will have to wait until later this year before they can become environmentally responsible and fiscally prudent.

Nevertheless, I have obtained figures from both Karbie Recycling and Commercial Recycling Limited that demonstrate the progress of this initiative. They can be found at the bottom of this post.

They show that, at present, 453 kilograms of waste is now being recycled per week, in addition to the waste that is collected and recycled from companies not participating in this scheme.

Commercial Recycling Limited will send out another mail shot towards the end of August; I have suggested that Jeremy Carpenter combines this with the knocking-up of all businesses in the town so that he can establish a personal rapport with each trader. He has agreed to my request and we feel that this will result in a substantial amount of new businesses signing up to the scheme.

• As of August 2008, Karbie Recycling collects and recycles a total of 240 kilograms of waste per week under the WMTC Business Recycling Initiative banner;

• As of August 2008, Commercial Recycling Limited collects and recycles a total of 213 kilograms per week under the WMTC Business Recycling Initiative banner, of which 180 kilograms is being diverted from landfill.

Post Office closures

On Tuesday, 15th July I attended a meeting at East Dorset District Council on the subject of Post Office closures in East Dorset. Obviously this is a sensitive subject and, although no branches will be closing in or around the immediate vicinity of Wimborne Minster, I think it remains important to take a measured look at what else is happening in our district; the next closure review is only three years away and therefore the impact of these closures may dictate the future of other closures.

In a nutshell, four branches in East Dorset are being actively considered for closure: Stapehill, Longham, Ferndown (Wimborne Road East) and Holt. It is my view that the proposes closures are all justified, especially since three out of the four branches receive little business and the fourth – Ferndown – has a larger branch very close by. It is important to remember that Post Office Limited is a business, not a government service, and therefore they operate with commercial interests at heart. On this note, we were informed that POL is losing £4 million a week, which, over a year, amounts to some £208 million.

POL recently reached an agreement with the Government that ensures HMG will grant them an annual subsidy of £150 million between now and 31st March 2011. There is therefore an annual deficit of £58 million that must be clawed back somehow in order to provide a better service to customers across the country. The closure of these four branches will, in my view, ensure that the local network of Post Offices is less stretched and services can thus be consolidated and improved.

When the date of 31st March 2011 passes, a new deal will need to be struck between POL and HMG. At that time there may be the chance that more local branches will be considered for closure, but if POL handles its affairs well between now and then, they are confident that further closures can be averted. Handling their affairs is, generally, a mixture of better management and better services – POL complained that a lot of custom was being lost to internet-based services, so it would be prudent for POL to offer certain services that cannot be found on the internet – or those which cannot be found for as cheap on the internet. The restoration of the TV licensing mechanism to POL is a likely outcome in the near future, which will certainly give them more business. Encouraging ratepayers to pay their council tax through POL would also be wise, even if a small surcharge of 25p were added to each customer’s transaction. As local representatives it is in our interests to keep our local Post Office as strong as possible, even if we see no financial benefit. Nevertheless, a strong Post Office becomes a hub of the community and, in this day and age, that is something to be applauded.

POL has 14,500 branches across the country; 166 out of 190 branches in Dorset should be retained after this consultation period has drawn to a close. Looking at those numbers, the proposed closures of just four branches in East Dorset should be considered quite fortunate from our point of view.

Meeting with Philip Atlay, KWTG Chairman

Today I held a meeting with Philip Atlay, the chairman of Keep Wimborne Town Green. Over the past few months his letters in the local press may have appeared shrill or repetitive, but I would like to defend Mr Atlay and commend his attention to detail with this Waitrose Question. Although I am leaning on the side of supporting a Waitrose development on the Hanhams' Ground, I do have a number of reservations.

The main issue that will cause me to vote either in favour or against is one of economics - will a Waitrose benefit the local economy in Wimborne, and will our traders see improved fortunes? Over the past few years we have witnessed a sharp rise in business rates and a downward trend for our local businesses as they fight against national chains and the march of mass-produced consumerism. Now, whilst I do not advocate a return to an idyllic 1950s scene (we must face up to modernity, after all), a balance should be struck. The environmental cost of the supermarket (which, in itself, needs to be analysed in more detail, particularly in relation to the ecology of the river and of the drainage system on-site) must be offset by gains in the local economy; the problems facing the traffic infrastructure must be offset, if at all possible, by the benefit to the community that a Waitrose would bring, with its public gardens, the creation of new jobs and access to the town square that could increase footfall in the High Street.

However, the main message of this post is to congratulate Mr Atlay on raising a most pertinent question: whilst Waitrose's supporters have accepted, at face value, the assessment of our Chamber of Trade that the arrival of Waitrose would boost local business, what evidence do they have to support this claim? Mr Atlay has examined the fortunes of neighbouring towns - Shaftesbury, Gillingham and Ringwood, to name but three - which have seen the construction of a new supermarket and the apparent "hoovering up" of trade to other businesses. Mr Atlay recommends the data on the website New Economics Forum as proof that a Waitrose would further drive up business rates, dominate local trade to an asphyxiating level, and ultimately cause Wimborne to be a commercial centre that can only be afforded by national chains.

We must look to the bigger picture and into the long-term. Facts and figures need to be produced, not rhetoric or one-line generalisations. The amount of disruption and disharmony can be measured, or disproved, in the evidence produced by other market towns which have gone through a similar process in the past. I hope those involved will dig deeper into this proposal than perhaps has been documented thus far.

Liverpool City Council and the nanny state gone mad?

I am all for using reasonable means to protect children from the dangers of alcohol and cigarette smoking, but you do have to wonder where the line blurs between responsible, proportional action and the dubious efforts of the famed "nanny state". What follows is an extract from an article on BBC News, which details how Liverpool City Council may be persuaded to use their local licensing laws to blanket-classify any motion picture that contains scenes of characters smoking with an 18 certificate. For the record, I support the BBFC's stance that such a move would be foolhardy and ultimately unpopular with the population-at-large.

Why can't we place more emphasis on education? Why can't we give our children the power of choice and the ability to make an informed decision for themselves, rather than wrapping them up in cotton wool and pretending that we live in a utopia?


An anti-smoking group in Liverpool is calling for all movies with smoking scenes to be given an 18 certificate. SmokeFree Liverpool told BBC's Radio 5 Live it wanted to see the change but the film classification board said the idea was "heavy-handed".

The push - backed by the city council - comes amid research showing young people pick up the bad habit from watching films containing smoking.

One city official said Liverpool may even act alone to restrict film access. Andy Hull, the city's head of public protection and chair of SmokeFree Liverpool, said an adult rating on movies that depict smoking will reduce the number of young people lighting up.

"The international evidence...is that one in two children between 11 and 18 who witness smoking in movies actually experiment with - and therefore start - smoking themselves," Mr Hull said of recent research. Liverpool already carries the unenviable title of lung cancer capital of England, with some of the highest smoking rates in the UK.

Mr Hull said Liverpool wants the British Board of Film Classification to act. But a spokeswoman for the film board said smoking and alcohol use are already taken into consideration when a film is rated and a blanket 18 certificate for all smoking scenes is "heavy handed".

"To simply classify a film 18 because people smoke in it would not be popular with the public," the spokeswoman said, adding an extensive public consultation has already examined the issue to come up with existing guidelines. For example, if a character popular with children such as Harry Potter was somehow promoting cigarettes or seen smoking, the film would be rated accordingly, she said.

Mr Hull said if the BBFC is not prepared to adopt an 18 certificate then the city will consider using licensing laws to bring in its own stricter ratings for films screened locally.

Car parking charges set to rise

This year will see East Dorset District Council increasing parking charges in all of their car parks across Wimborne Minster. In addition, EDDC will be designating car parks as either short-stay or long-stay, based on their proximity to the centre of town; short-stay car parks will be designed for shoppers and the long-stay car parks will provide better value for money for those people who work in the town and wish to park (and pay) for all day.

As an example, the cost of parking for two hours in a short-stay car park will rise from 50p to £1. However, in a move that will benefit those consumers who wish to do only a few things in town before heading on, there will now be an option to pay for a previously-inexistent half an hour of parking - for all of 30p. I'm certainly the type of shopper who quite frequently needs to park for only half an hour or less.

Whilst there have been small waves of criticism targeted towards EDDC because of their proposal to increase charges, I support these across-the-board increases. EDDC has to make savings to balance their various budgets and to continue to invest in more important areas of public service. If they couldn't make these savings from the car parks, is there another (relatively) uncontroversial area where they could find the same amount of money?

Another plus point is the ability to choose between short- and long-stay, a concept that hasn't existed in the town for a few years. And, in fact, this new structure will no doubt free up more parking spaces in the central town area - those 9-5 workers who are currently occupying the shoppers' spaces will move to the long-stay car parks on the periphery, creating additional spaces which would encourage more shoppers into the town. That would surely improve the traders' takings, not hurt their income as some others have suggested.

Nevertheless, I will watch with interest over the next few months as these new parking charges are implemented. If the changes do have a sustained negative impact on our traders then I will call for EDDC to review this decision. I hope - and quietly expect - that situation won't need to occur.

Banishing cigarette litter

At the last meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee, on 28 February, the Committee members considered a report which I had submitted regarding the prevalence of unsightly cigarette litter across Wimborne Minster. In the report I propose a number of solutions, which hopefully will receive the endorsement of my fellow councillors in the coming weeks. That report can be read, in full, below.

Please note that since the report was published, it has been brought to my attention that Wimborne in Bloom should not be asked for funding to combat this cigarette litter. With this in mind, please disregard the paragraph in which I suggest otherwise.

TO: Chairman of the Planning and Environment Committee
CC: Town Clerk
SUBJECT: Cigarette Litter

In 2007 it was agreed by the Planning and Environment Committee that the levels of cigarette litter in the town were unacceptable. This litter, caused by butts discarded on the pavements and outside shop fascias, was having a negative impact on the town's aesthetics and jeopardising the strong environmental work that was being carried out in other quarters.

Some months later, the problem is still present.

I recommend therefore that Wimborne Minster Town Council undertakes a concerted effort to eradicate this problem and to educate traders and residents on the consequences of littering. In recent months, news reached us that Wimborne Minster had failed to win the coveted top prize at the Britain in Bloom awards, a decision that was no doubt partly influenced by the sheer number of cigarette butts that litter our streets. Furthermore, since the smoking ban of July 2007 was introduced, more people are smoking outside premises in the town and thus the problem has become more immediately noticeable.

To alleviate this problem it is important to recognise and categorise the areas of the town where the litter is the most pronounced. Whilst this is by no means a comprehensive list, I suggest that areas of immediate concern include: The Tivoli Theatre, the Wimborne Kebab House, The Rising Sun, The Cricketers, Crown Mead, The White Hart, the area by the Minster Sandwich Shop, The Three Cooks, Topogigio, the area by HSBC and the adjacent bus stop, the pathway that leads past the Minster towards the Methodist Church, the Teachers' Building Society, the taxi rank on the Square's traffic roundabout, the Redcotts Recreation Ground, the Leigh Park Recreation Ground, and the green space which leads to the river at the back of Salamander.

Once these areas are identified, the installation of "butt bins" (metallic containers which are mounted on walls and inside which cigarettes are discarded) will help to remedy the situation. For evidence of this, areas of the town where butt bins are already installed – such as outside the Town Hall and on the pavement by the King's Head Hotel – have led to a decrease in the amount of cigarette litter. Granted, the problem will not be totally eradicated, but I predict the situation could improve to a stage where only 50% of the current litter is present. Over time this could be increased to some 75%.

To address the issue of securing funding for these butt bins, I have already raised this matter with the local charity Vision Wimborne, an organisation which possesses accounts that could support the purchase of a number of butt bins. In addition, it would be logical to petition Wimborne in Bloom and the Chamber of Trade for similar levels of funding.

After the installation of these butt bins, it is equally as important to use the local press to publicise their presence and to comment about the unsightly nature of cigarette litter. Usage of the Chamber of Trade will also be necessary, in as much as their regular newsletter would serve as an excellent way to send our message to almost all traders in the town. After all, it is the traders who have a duty of care to look after their shop fascias and to ensure that their butt bins are emptied regularly.

Another issue of concern is the increase in cigarette litter after Friday and Saturday nights. It is not too surprising to notice that an increase in alcohol consumption at the weekends goes hand-in-hand with an increase in smoking, but what is surprising is the sheer number of cigarette butts that are left on the pavements outside our town's pubs. I believe that nearly all the pubs provide adequate butt bins or even large buckets of sand outside their front doors, yet most revellers refuse to use them. With this in mind, I suggest that we also hold discussions with the landlords of each pub in the town, asking them to instruct their bouncers to strongly encourage all pavement-dwelling smokers to dispose of their cigarette butts in the appropriate manner.

RECOMMENDED that the Planning & Environment Committee endorses this report, and that we:

- Launch this campaign against cigarette litter as another environmental initiative to complement both Cllr Feltham's scheme to ban plastic bags in the town and my earlier scheme to increase recycling, all of which fall under the new policy of "Towards a Greener Wimborne";

- Encourage Members to each suggest areas of the town where cigarette litter is the most prevalent and unsightly;

- Ask the Chairman of the Planning & Environment Committee to then compile this evidence into a definitive list of these "hotspots";

- Recognise that each hotspot must then be counteracted by the installation of at least one butt bin;

- Hold a meeting with Chairman Shrubb of Vision Wimborne, Chairman Oliver of Wimborne in Bloom and President Beckett of the Chamber of Trade in an attempt to secure community funding from all three organisations to purchase the required number of butt bins;

- Ask the Planning & Environment Committee to contribute any required, additional funding to aid in the purchase of these butt bins;

- Send an appropriate press release to The Daily Echo, the Town & Village Times and The Stour and Avon Magazine with details of this campaign and of the negative effects that arise from cigarette litter;

- Remind traders that they have a duty of care towards their shop fascias and that they alone must empty their butt bins on a regular basis, both of which form part of their responsibility to their community;

- Hold discussions with each landlord in the town, asking them to instruct their bouncers to strongly encourage pavement-dwelling smokers to dispose of their cigarette butts in a responsible manner;

- Extend and reassess this campaign in the near future to target any remaining areas and to invest in more butt bins if necessary.

Report to Full Council

Last Tuesday I delivered the following report to this year's first meeting of Full Council:


Mr Chairman, let me begin by commending the Town Clerk for his insightful and clear CCTV report that was published in January. A lot of hard work went into analysing a very important issue for our town.

I would like to take this opportunity to announce to Full Council that I am in the midst of proposing a new initiative, although the finer details are yet to be cemented. In essence, I am hoping to encourage all landlords in Wimborne Minster to offer discounted soft drinks to designated drivers at the weekends – specifically on Friday and Saturday evenings. As our town becomes more popular as a weekend social attraction, the prevalence of drink driving is increasing and this is a trend that we need to curtail. I am sure that more drivers would be willing to forgo a pint of lager if the prices of soft drinks did not carry such ridiculous mark-ups. I hope to send out information and to hold talks with landlords to iron out this idea into a workable policy; Cllr McCarthy has already been helpful.

Before Full Council next meets, the Planning and Environment Committee will have had the chance to discuss plans to curb the amount of cigarette litter in Wimborne Minster – an important task that I look forward to being involved in.

Finally, I would again like to respond to Cllr Hymers on the subject of the 2008 Folk Festival. I know she is disappointed that the festival organisers did not receive the £6,000 grant that they asked for – instead falling some £2,000 short – but it is important to stress that the 2007 Festival carried the subsequent burden of a clean-up bill that ran into the thousands of pounds. I think I can speak on behalf of Wimborne's ratepayers when I say that this accumulated expense should not be made on the same scale in 2008, and thus a cut in the initial grant is an acceptable compromise for a 3-day festival.

A future of overdevelopment in Wimborne?

Earlier this week I heard that the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) has recommended that an additional 8,000 homes should be built in East Dorset between now and 2028. Up to 1,000 have been earmarked for Wimborne Minster - considering we currently have about 3,300 properties in our town, an additional 1,000 is a cause for concern.

In the past five years I have noticed a surge in the problem of traffic congestion and demand on public services. Can our town's infrastructure cope with the average of 1,000 extra cars that these new houses would bring (assuming that some households will have no cars and others will have more than one)? Can the emergency services cope with the extra demand? Can our Councils continue to provide effective, or even improved, service? The list of questions will no doubt grow as time passes.

I am not against development or the evolution of our local area. I am, however, against overdevelopment and this is precisely what the addition of 1,000 houses is - they will be slapped down at the back of Walford Close, on a plot of land that has a water table which is incapable of supporting such construction. No mention of the provision of affordable housing for young or financially-handicapped individuals has been mentioned, either.

Regardless of these points, what happens to the existing residents of Walford Close and Poets' Corner? What happens to the roads and access routes on the Wimborne-Colehill border? In addition, there are plans to build on the allotments at the back of Cuthbury Gardens, something that has long-been-mooted, despite objections from local residents.

East Dorset District Council are now being asked to approve these RSS recommendations and, if approved (as expected), the development could begin anytime between now and 2028. I hope to campaign against this - will Keep Wimborne Town Green join me? Or are their sights considerably more introverted?

Change that we can believe in

As he delivered his victory speech in Iowa, Barack Obama spoke of "change that we can believe in". He has also stressed, in the words of Martin Luther King, "the fierce urgency of now".

There are many parallels at the moment between the American and British political systems. Both have been taken hostage by lobbyists, by big government machinery, by the rot of inefficiency and of dishonesty. What the Americans need is what the British need: a government of principles, and local representatives who stand tall above the party-political divide to bring regeneration and strength to an area.

Instead of having local representatives who are afraid to speak their mind, let us put forward a long-term strategy for Dorset, which will be a chance for us to see change that we can all believe in. Let's have a dialogue with residents to create our 2020 vision – a plan to tackle rising crime levels, to fight social injustice, to realise the need to have a local health system that is as much about prevention as it is post-diagnostic care, to embrace the fierce urgency of ensuring that our children are receiving well-rounded yet tailored educations, and to raise the smaller issues, like a way to combat increasing traffic congestion and transport-related problems in the county.

It is not clichéd to say that together we can achieve great things. Ambitious, certainly, but I am confident that the tools are there to bring about real improvement to people's daily lives, and of the seeds that can be sown to ensure long-term prosperity.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

This blog has now celebrated its first birthday and a lot has happened over the past 12 months. Let me take this opportunity to wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year; 2008 will pose some interesting questions and challenges for us in Wimborne Minster, most notably regarding Waitrose and the proposed Town Square Enhancement. Nevertheless, my interests are certainly not limited to these two topics and I do hope that more attention can be focused elsewhere.

On a more sour note, I received an email from a resident on December 19th which drew my attention to a rather bizarre turn of events. It transpires that after my poll on Waitrose was publicised in The Daily Echo, someone (or some people) took it upon themselves to abuse the facility by voting numerous times. In the space of one hour, over 100 votes were logged in the "no" category after the "yes" vote had started to increase, which curiously kept the percentage margins at some 64-36 against. Considering the poll has been running since the start of 2007 and only 350 votes had been cast up until December, the 100 votes in under one hour were a cause for concern. As a result, I have created a new poll which hopefully is more tamper-proof. I find it quite frankly amazing that people would want to abuse the facility anyway!

Waitrose application delayed

The latest installment in this convoluted saga is that Waitrose has decided to temporarily withdraw their application in light of comments from planning chiefs. In a press release from East Dorset District Council, Mike Hirsh, Head of Planning and Building Control said: "Following on from consultations conducted by the Council and analysis of the application, further information is required on a number of key matters including drainage and highways issues."

He added: "A provisional date of 28 January 2008 had been proposed for a special meeting of the Council's Planning Committee. However, to conduct the meeting on this date would not allow enough time for Waitrose to submit the additional information and planning officers to prepare their report. The meeting has, therefore, had to be postponed. A future date will be announced as soon as a further meeting has been arranged."

I will therefore wait to compile my thoughts on the application until Waitrose has confirmed the new date for submission. Please continue to send comments through to me in the meantime.