To outline the principal measures contained in the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 and to provide an overview of the potential impact of the new Act on the services provided by the Environment Directorate.

The Committee was informed of the principal measures contained in the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 and received an overview of the potential impact of the Act on services provided by the Environment Directorate.

The Head of Environmental Health and Trading Standards reported that the Act was a key part of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) five-year environment strategy to clean up people’s immediate environment, boost sustainable development, increase energy efficiency and care for the rural communities.  As a consequence it covered a number of environmental issues e.g. vehicles, litter, waste, noise, dogs and crime and disorder.  The report outlined the various powers in the Act, their commencement or likely commencement date and an overview of the likely impact on the Directorate and Council.

He reported that the Council had, where possible, started to implement the relevant powers in the Act and whilst this had not been completely finalised it was expected that the new powers would be delegated in accordance with Appendix 1 to the report.  Complications had arisen in implementing those powers that had commenced, in that in many instances the Government had been late in issuing the relevant guidance.

He further reported that the Cabinet Member (Environment) had set the level for fixed penalty notices for those areas where powers had commenced at £100 for litter, fly posting and graffiti offences (reduced to £50 if paid within 14 days). On commencement a similar £100 penalty would be set for dog offences.  Charges for the collection of shopping trolleys had not yet been set as further work, including consultation, was ongoing to establish a fixed charge.

During debate the following principal points were noted:

• The Council’s dog byelaw system would be replaced by Dog Control Orders.  However, a number of issues still needed clarification particularly in relation to Parish/Town Councils undertaking aspects of enforcement.

• The current joint arrangement with the Police for the collection of stray dogs would need to terminate with the Council taking full responsibility.  This would have funding and operational implications for the Council.  While it could be expected that the issuing of control orders would have an impact, currently a number of Magistrates Courts had taken a lenient view of prosecution of byelaw offences.

• The introduction of new Litter Clearance Notices was welcomed and should enable the Council to enforce areas it had been unable to in the past.  The Act also confirmed that cigarette butts and discarded chewing gum were litter.  In this respect the Committee particularly noted a comment that the Government were considering imposing a hefty tax on chewing gum with the proceeds being used to help Councils with the cost of cleaning chewing gum from footways.  The Committee wished to record their support for such a proposal to tax chewing gum (particularly the synthetic gum) and invited the Executive to make representations on the matter.

• Nuisance from light pollution (street lighting and other major sources were exempt) was included in the Act.  Environmental Health staff would therefore run the risk of becoming embroiled in neighbour disputes.

• The Director of Environment reported that no additional resources had been allocated by Government to support the implementation of the Act.  While the Act did enable the setting of fixed penalty notices, the income from these was not expected to be substantial.  The existing budgets would therefore have to be re-cast to accommodate the extra statutory requirements.

• The delegation of certain enforcement powers would need close monitoring. While the use of Community Support Officers was welcomed, they were under the command of the Chief Constable and therefore dependent on the degree of local delegation.  Initially the Committee considered holding a special meeting to debate the issues with the various parties involved, however, it was decided to await the outcome of guidance on the use of enforcement powers.

• It was suggested that when a further report was made to the Committee a fourth column be added to Appendix 1 to indicate when the power had been implemented.

RESOLVED:

That                   a) the implications arising from the Clean Neighbourhood and Environment Act 2005 outlined in the report be noted;

b) the Director of Environment convey the Committee’s support for the imposition of a tax on chewing gum and the Executive be invited to make representations on the matter; and

c) a fourth column be added to Appendix 1 in future reports to indicate when the relevant power had been implemented.