London Wider Waste Strategy - London - Greater London Authority

survey(s)
Mixed collection and based on another
authority’s/national survey
2 0 2
Other (please specify) 4 1 5
Totals 8 5 13
Base: thirteen authorities answered this question.
Only one authority was able to use the most accurate method for determining figures, i.e.
separate collection and weighbridge. Five authorities used a local recent survey undertaken in
their own authority, whilst two used surveys from other authorities. Five used other methods:
two were estimates, one was an approximation based on customer type, one was part separate
collections and weighbridge and one was a combination of survey and calculations.
The final question relating to waste tonnages asked authorities to provide approximate
tonnages on wastes that are of commercial or industrial origin but that are included in
household waste figures. Ten of the 18 respondents did not answer this question or did not
have information available. The remaining answers were considered too variable to usefully
include in this report.
The authorities were asked about their views regarding which approach (i.e. DSO, private waste
companies, externalised or other) to collection gave the most beneficial service in terms of most
cost effective service, clean local environment, changes in demand and changes in legislation.
Nine respondents chose ‘don’t know/can’t say’ or did not answer this question. Most of those
who answered did so in accordance with their authorities’ current approach to waste collection.
There were three interesting exceptions:
• A unitary authority that currently used private waste companies who identified that
an externalised service would be most likely to provide the greatest ability to
respond to changes in legislation;
• A WCA with a DSO service suggested that a private waste company would be the
most beneficial for changes in demand.
• A WCA with a DSO service was not able to say which would provide the best service
for meeting changes in demand or legislation (whilst they did identify the DSO as
providing the most beneficial approach for the cost-effective service and clean local
environment).
This question generated several comments. Two unitary authorities indicated that all these
factors are determined by the service specification, contract and client/contractor relationship.
One WCA stated that the DSO model has the potential to be the most cost-effective as there is
no need to make the degree of profit demanded of private companies by their shareholders.
The same respondent also considered the DSO to be the most flexible option and therefore
most likely to secure a clean environment and be most responsive to changes in demand, local
requirements and legislation. Another WCA commented that there was a need for “more
cohesion and co-ordination possibly London wide; the patchwork approach is not efficient in
economic or environmental terms and can impede infrastructure development.” Another WCA
noted that their answers to this question could change when WETS is introduced. Finally, one
WCA suggested that the “BPEO could well be that the WCA is required to arrange to collect all
commercial wastes free of charge for as standard service.”
168