Agenda item

In accordance with paragraph 2.24 of the Council’s Committee Procedure Rules and Appendix on Public Speaking, set out in the Constitution, a total period of 15 minutes is allocated for members of the public to put questions to the committee on any matter relating to this agenda. Each member of the public will be allowed up to two minutes each to speak, and the Chair will have discretion to vary this where they consider it appropriate.

Members of the public wishing to speak are required to provide notice of this at least three clear working days in advance of the meeting.

Petitions - To receive any petitions which have met the criteria - Petitions Scheme Criteria, and falls within the remit of the Committee. Petition organisers will be allowed up to three minutes to speak.

The following members of the public attended the meeting to speak in relation to item 6 – Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC) Review Final Recommendations:

Mr Trevor Priestman presented a petition to the committee relating to the potential closure of the HWRC sites in Poynton, Middlewich and Bollington. The petition had received over 7000 signatures. Mr Priestman felt that when the public consultation was announced, the decision to close the sites had already been made and that the impact on residents borough-wide was dismissed. As there was already an item on the agenda dealing with this subject matter, the committee agreed to note the petition.

Mr Brian Perkins asked a number of questions regarding the closure of the HWRCs;

• How could the Committee vote on only two preferred options when there was a high risk– Operationally Effective was amber and Acceptability was red?
• What and where in the report was the weighting and scoring criteria?
• Could all Committee members confirm they had scrutinised the proposal implementation plans and detailed costs?
• How was the success of the trial mobile HWRC being measured and by whom?
• Had the councillors seen any evidence of trial monitoring before today?
• What was the average cost in pounds per visitor and pounds per tonnage for each of the Mobile tip vs Macclesfield tip?
• What was the total cost of employing ‘Waste Education Specialists” Recruitment, training, salaries etc?
• What evidence existed that residents would be receiving value for money for such resources?
• What and where were the plans and costs for site improvements that were to remain open?
• Have all Committee members seen those plans before today’s meeting?

Mr Perkins requested confirmation or otherwise that Councillor J Snowball and Councillor K Edwards had submitted the questions asked by ‘Bollington Save Our Tip Group’ dated 14^th July as they were requested to do. And if they did, could the Chair confirm answers to them and on what date.

It was agreed that a written response would be provided outside of the meeting.

Mr Jon Park asked members not to vote on the closure of the HMRCs today and instead give the related Town Councils time to come up with alternative proposals.

Mr Greg Lisle requested that the recommendations be amended so that Bollington Town Council could work with Cheshire East Council (CEC) to look at revised HWRC services. The request was made following statistics shared with the committee on the number of slots available, uptake on those slots, no shows, and the approximate cost per user on that particular day in respect of the mobile tip which visited once a month.

Mr Stuart Redgard spoke in support of the proposal. Mr Redgard stated that, although the closures were not what he would like to see, the Council was having to make difficult decisions and the closure of HWRCs was an example of those.

Councillor Robert Douglas shared his concerns on the details in the report, relating specifically to the costs of a new site at Congleton and provided a number of examples of other sites recently constructed. Although it was common for quotations to vary, Councillor Douglas suggested that additional quotations were obtained.

Councillor John Stewart asked why the formal response from Bollington Town Council to the HWRC consultation was not included in the consultation report. Councillor Stewart raised the following questions and requested that the Council consider other options, such as site sharing with Poynton and Bollington, community involvement, parish funding.

1.Was a safety risk assessment done by, or for, CEC to determine whether the decision to mothball and potentially now close three local ’Tip’s,’ to funnel significant additional traffic into an ailing Macclesfield ‘Tip’, was a safe decision?

2. Was any consideration made about the economic consequences for the residents of Cheshire East of this proposal to close Bollington Tip?

3. Was there any consideration of the environmental consequences?

4. Since the new contracts run from September 2025, what would happen when the existing contracts end in April 2025?

5. How was it that, in spite of Bollington Town Council’s plea to consider alternative options to save the HWRC from closure, officers chose not to engage with the Town Council on these ideas for over 4 months since the final correspondence in May 2024.

Councillor Suzy Firkin stated that fly tipping had increased following the closure of the Congleton HWRC. Councillor Firkin questioned why mobile sites had been offered to Bollington, Middlewich, and Poynton but not to Congleton.

Councillor Laurence Clark questioned how costs were calculated and why there was such secrecy around the newly procured HWRC operating costs and why they could not be published.