Home > Your Council > Decision details





Decision details

Fly Tipping Review - Executive Response

Decision Maker: Executive

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decisions:

Decision that the responses to the recommendations of the Operations Review Committee, as outlined in Appendix A to Report EX/18/60, be agreed and that this be reported back to the Operations Review Committee accordingly.

 

Reasons for the Decision

 

The Operations Review Committee had identified fly tipping as a matter of local concern and recognised that the problem was becoming a nationwide issue that carried health and safety risks as well as being an environmental eyesore.  The scrutiny committee had sought clarity on how well the Council was combatting fly tipping.  The review’s main objective had been to identify methods of reducing and detecting fly tipping in view of the Council’s duty as a public body to ensure that all possible solutions were put in place.

 

In accordance with the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 and the Council’s Constitution, the Executive was required to respond to recommendations from scrutiny committees with an indication of what action the Executive proposed to take.

 

The reasons for each of the responses to the individual recommendations were detailed in the report’s appendix.  Whilst most of the recommendations were agreed, notably recommendations 1, 5, 6, 8 and 10, the remainder were either partially agreed (2 and 3) or not agreed (4, 7 and 9).

 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

An alternative option of ignoring the issue of fly tipping was not regarded as an acceptable way forward.  Hence, Officers and Members were committed to improving the Council’s current approach to the prevention of fly tipping.

 

The possibility of approving all the recommendations without qualification was not regarded as appropriate as some were outside the Council’s remit, were not feasible or required further future consideration.

 

Key Points Arising from the Discussion

 

·       Referring to scrutiny recommendation 3, a non-Executive Member pointed out that CCTV was the most effective deterrent to fly tipping and, in relation to possible increased investment, asked about the current criteria for placing cameras in susceptible areas.  The Community Safety and Performance Portfolio Holder stressed the value of mobile cameras.  He clarified that, following prosecution aided by a fixed camera, an offender would be aware of a camera’s location and be able to move the problem elsewhere whereas mobile cameras were able to catch offenders ‘in the act’.  He added that mobile cameras were not more expensive but critical appraisal would need to be undertaken that could justify placing people under surveillance as they pursued their day-to-day lives.

 

·       A Member of the Review Panel said that he welcomed the Executive’s approval of recommendation 6 in respect of the inclusion of a fly tipping budget within the Council’s annual budget as the problem involved swift action by the Council.

 

·       The Housing Portfolio Holder, who sat on the CCTV Partnership, suggested that, aside from the use of CCTV to tackle the problem, everyone should be encouraged to be vigilant and report any offences to the Environmental Health department.  She added that much of the fly tipping in Borehamwood occurred behind the shops and that it was not possible to insert cameras in these locations as it was private land.

 

 (Action:  Head of Street Scene Services/Democratic Services Officers)

 

 

Report author: Steve Burton

Publication date: 22/10/2018

Date of decision: 17/10/2018

Decided at meeting: 17/10/2018 - Executive

Accompanying Documents: