To provide an update to the scrutiny committee on the establishment of new waste recovery contract and an update on roll-out of garden waste collection.

The Chair took the report on Waste Recovery Contracting as read and opened the item up for debate. The key points of discussion included:

1.     Members asked about the council’s landfill target and current performance. The officer explained that the target had been to send no more than 1% of waste to landfill, a level the council had achieved consistently for years. Landfill had been used only for materials that could not be treated otherwise—such as asbestos—or during planned maintenance when the energy?from?waste facility had temporarily been unable to accept waste.

2.     Members queried whether future waste disposal contracts (post?2029) would maintain the same landfill reduction targets. The officer confirmed that the council intended to retain similar environmental commitments, although the landfill site was due to revert to the contractor in 2029, meaning the council would no longer directly control landfill capacity.

3.     Members asked whether the single end?to?end contract could be replaced with multiple contracts and whether risks of fragmentation had been considered. The Cabinet Member said the council had been exploring various procurement options and that fragmentation might have posed challenges but also offered flexibility, particularly in light of national policy changes such as extended producer responsibility and deposit return schemes.

4.     Members questioned whether higher recycling rates might have reduced inputs to the energy?from?waste facility and affected revenue. The officer noted that the forthcoming Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), due from 2028–29, was expected to introduce carbon costs, encouraging waste minimisation, and that the facility could accept waste from commercial sources or other councils if required.

5.     Members expressed concern that the facility required consistent feedstock and might have created a need to source waste. Officers confirmed that a continuous supply had been required for efficient operation but noted that this waste need not have come solely from council collections and could be sourced from other authorities or commercial operators.

6.     Members asked if the garden waste subscription service was on track to break even. The officer said forecasting uptake had been difficult but noted that other councils had seen 4–15% first?year uptake. Herefordshire had approximately 3,700 subscribers, with numbers expected to rise during spring and summer.

7.     Members asked how private providers might have affected subscription levels. The officer noted that private services operated on rolling contracts, meaning residents can switch to the council’s competitively priced service as their contracts expired.

8.     Members asked how early?stage financial pressures had been managed. The officer explained that the council had agreed reduced operational resources with the contractor while subscriber numbers remained low and had established a financial reserve to mitigate early financial risk.

9.     Members sought assurance about introducing a separate food waste collection. The Cabinet Member confirmed that the council had remained committed under the Environment Act 2021, but highlighted that expected government funding had not been provided and that implementation—estimated at £2.6 million per year—would have required new funding and governance arrangements.

10.  Members suggested that separating food waste could have reduced odours and allowed longer intervals for residual waste collections. The Cabinet Member agreed, adding that food waste separation could have raised public awareness of food waste and supported behavioural change.

11.  Members asked whether the council could have supported community fridges or food?sharing schemes. Officers said such schemes were typically run by community organisations, though the idea could be explored through local hubs.

12.  Members asked whether recycling centres could have facilitated the reuse of items. The Cabinet Member acknowledged that many items taken to recycling centres might still have been usable but said current practices prioritised recycling, and once placed in recycling containers, items could not generally be removed; reuse opportunities could be considered in future contracts.

13.  Members asked about further segregation of recycling materials. The Cabinet Member said any changes would have needed to consider public acceptance, as introducing too many new bins too quickly might have discouraged participation, making a phased approach more suitable.

14.  Members asked how the council planned to meet new requirements for collecting flexible plastics. The officer said legislation required collection from April the following year, though markets were still developing; one option had been to use a durable plastic bag within the existing system to separate these materials without needing additional collection vehicles.

At the conclusion of the debate the committee discussed and agreed the following recommendations.

That the Executive:

1. Consider in good time the risks emerging from legislative and industry regulatory changes to the viability of the energy waste facility in Worcestershire.

2. Publish a clear timetable for introducing a separate food waste collection service, including funding approach and dependencies.

3. Consider ways Herefordshire Council could minimise waste produced in Herefordshire.

4. Work with Talk Community to look at the possibility of community larders or fridges in rural locations.