Recycling collections - what's going on?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on November 4, 2012 at 16:08

Councillors on the Scrutiny Panel are: Karen Alexander, Jonathan Bloch, Stuart McNamara (chair) Lyn Weber and me. Our interim report was agreed by the main Overview & Scrutiny Committee on 22 October.  Click here, then on "Tabled Report" and scroll down two pages to "Interim report on waste and recycling services".

Is what we did transparent? Well there are thirty pages, including tables and a lot of photos of bins. Scroll down to page 9 (part 3) for the recommendations. There are 10 of those with 19 sub-paragraphs. So I'm not going to reproduce them.

More consultation material was coming in, and a further session was planned. However, there's nothing to stop the Cabinet and Cllr Nilgun Canver getting on with putting some or all of the recommendations into action.

Or not. That's the weakness of the "Cabinet" System.

As for people finding out that "the reports don't seem to have much effect", that is not my own experience. Or at least not in that sweeping form. It depends on what's reported and where. And in particular, how the problem is "framed".

When I walk to our local newsagent, or to their next door neighbour a small pharmacist, there's often a pile of waste dumped on the pavement outside. I took the photo below on 2 November. Yesterday (3 November) my colleague Cllr Stuart McNamara (it's in his ward) took a cameraphone snap to report a bigger stinkier pile. 

Reporting this dumping gets it cleared. What it won't do is to alter the behaviour of people who think leaving their waste on the pavement outside their local shops is okay.

Ant, you will spot - and be justified in thinking - that the Veolia purple bag on the left almost certainly helps to legitimate and endorse that behaviour. Which is why I added the photo to a set called 'I' Is for imitation.

About having better feedback on reports, I've been arguing for this for several years. One way is for Veolia and the Council's Waste Management staff to improve online reporting by adding facilities for publicly viewable maps, photographs and feedback. Like FixMyStreet and Love Clean London. Haringey and Veolia are currently trialling a new reporting app which we're told will do this. I hope you'll use it and see the difference.

Though my doubts - when I first heard of  this type of system in Boston, Massachusetts -  include concern about it skewing services towards areas with high smartphone usage. I've also queried what happens if there's no change in "up-the-pipe" behaviour. It's even possible that a more efficient sweeping and rubbish collection service might increase the risk that we "teach" people it's okay to just toss stuff out.

(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ant on November 5, 2012 at 9:00

Thanks for the report link Alan, i shall take a look.

Re the example of how you reported some dumpimg and got it cleared - how do you in fact know that it was the reporting that got it cleared? It was by a public bin so perhaps they just happened to empty the public bin and so took the other bags too, or it was near a purple street cleaner bag so perhaps they took the other bags when they collected the street cleaner bag, or something else? Without any feed back from the report there is no way of knowing that it made any difference is there?

Can you (or anyone) give a link to the new reporting app being trialed?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on November 5, 2012 at 12:31

Ant, of course you're right to point out the logical fallacy: "after something happened, therefore because it happened". But you've also opened-up a fascinating discussion - at least to me.

How do I know rubbish is cleared because of my reports? I don't. And most of the time as a resident walking past, it doesn't matter to me. The feedback I care about is not whose report was effective but that the rubbish went.

A few years ago I was delighted that Year 6 kids from a local primary school were reporting streetscene faults as part of their ICT lessons. And of course it wasn't just learning how to use computers and the internet; but writing, mapping, learning about the environment, and becoming young citizens.

The teacher I spoke to told me that initially the students' sometimes incorrectly spelled or punctuated reports were seen as someone messing about. But that was quickly sorted out with the Call Centre staff.

Did street cleaners, other residents, or local councillors stop sending in reports? No. Too many reports are better than none. Provided that systems in place are capable of responding to variations in demand. And are also able to filter duplicate reports so they don't generate unnecessary work.)

But where the reporting/recording systems need to be smart as well as efficient is with what Liz Ixer calls the "ethnography of dumping". Which includes trying to understand the 'who', 'why', and 'what' of people's behaviour; how it does or doesn't follow the waste systems in place. And in particular what can be learned from particular patterns of behaviour over time. E.g. The same spot repeatedly used for dumping.

Sometimes the pattern suggested is not what residents and businesses do or fail to do, but repeated systemic malaise in a part of the Council. My two favourites are - several years ago - the mystery of the vanishing street; and in 2010/11 the famous navy sofa. (You won't be surprised to hear that when I reported the latter I didn't get a reportback on what steps were taken to repair what seemed to be a broken system.)

I await an update on the new reporting app. I'll post news here as I get it.

(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on October 31, 2012 at 13:41

You worry about people being put off reporting, despite the fact that all over the site you will find advice, phone numbers and even a damn great button on the home page that makes it easy.

I worry that committed citizens like Ant who don't fit neatly into the civic core are constantly ignored or even characterised as online moaners who do nothing in 'real life', which neatly fits the narratives being set up by the Koberistas, Claire herself making that very observation in a recent speech, and which I find astonishing that you would repeat here.

It's convenient for people like the cabinet members to say that those people who won't join in are of less worth than those who turn up week after week,month after month at church halls or join parties or committees or groups but if nothing changes except those people get plenty of oil for their squeaky wheels, while those who can't or won't or have had enough of being undermined in negotiating the minefield that is attempting to make changes within the civic core are dismissed.

I hate to bring up the Community Volunteers again, who would have been an excellent way to get information out and Ant would have been a fine candidate for our ranks, but it is prime example of how anyone beyond the core is treated. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on October 31, 2012 at 14:26

Did Claire Kober actually say something I might agree with? When and where was it?

Well the Dear Maximum Leader can't be wrong all the time. Even though she has an amazingly consistent record for poor judgements and talking inane twaddle.

Please forget the "Civic Core". Most of the time and for most practical purposes Claire and her chums can be thought of like small kids on a merry-go-round. They're having great fun. Their world is going round-and-round, up-and-down. Music's playing;  people are smiling and waving. And they're waving back. "Look mummy no hands! I'm the leader."

But any real change has to come from elsewhere. And that includes residents raising issues about poor services with Council staff and contractors. I am delighted to learn that Ant is a committed citizen and is engaged in this process.

Ant, my apologies if I have got you completely wrong. I was responding to how I read what you wrote on HoL.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Liz on October 31, 2012 at 14:35

But you don't agree with it Alan. She was having a pop at Barnet bloggers who you have a lot of respect for, over Nick Walkley. I believe it was in the council chamber but maybe you missed it.

You know that online work can be enormously valuable and often leads to off line action. If it doesn't, then at least it is a way that people can measure their own commitment. Invariably people who are sufficiently cross/enthused/curious about something online will find ways to pursue it offline. If they don't, it was probably a non-starter to begin with.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on October 31, 2012 at 14:52

Doesn't ring a bell. And I'm not going to comment on something I can't remember hearing or reading.

The last time I was in a full Council meeting I spoke and voted against the appointment of Mr Nick Walkley as Haringey Chief Executive. I made a point of putting on record my special thanks to the Barnet Bloggers as:

"important back-room volunteers, public spirited people who have worked long and hard, without thanks on this".

I don't know how often online comments do or don't lead to offline action. Plainly, the online contacts can make offline organising far easier than in the days of duplicators, stuffing envelopes, knocking on doors, and telephone trees.

But I have the impression that quite a few people start and finish at the online comment stage.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on October 31, 2012 at 16:12

Oh ye of little faith. I'm not going to list all the real world actions that have resulted from this website or others like it, Alan. I think, in actual fact, you're well aware of them. There are results both in terms of tangible actions and the less tangible issues around sentiment, social capital, so on and so forth. 

I do feel that you're taking easy and ill-considered swipes in your comments to Ant, Alan. This seems uncharacteristically grumpy and unfair coming from you. If I was Ant, I would be feeling pretty disgruntled at someone making sweeping and uncharitable assumptions about me, let alone someone who's currently an elected politician doing so.

As Liz has said, Ant cannot be accused of being an armchair citizen. Right now, for example, he's working hard to organise a fantastic event which you will read about soon.

So, that's Ant - and what of other people who choose to Kvetch? I'm surprised that someone from the non-Luddite wing of Haringey Labour thinks this is an issue that has got anything to to do with whether the conversation or comments are online or offline.

Are you seriously telling me that you think online is different to any other medium in this respect? Are you telling me that all the letters, phone calls and carrier pigeon messages you get are any different in the range and proportion of negative/positive constructive/non-constructive comments they contain? Are the conversations you hear on the bus, in the pub, in the post office, or the public meetings you attend any different? I'd say they're most certainly not. People are people however they're communicating.

So, is there anything wrong with complaining? I think, taken in the round, complaining serves a social and practical purpose, but I won't dwell on the ins and outs of that here. As far as the medium of complaining goes, a letter in the mail gets a response or it doesn't. The same with a phone call or carrier pigeon message. Whereas a conversation online or offline can and does lead to the resolution of issues through the sharing of information or the coming together for action. You know that, Alan, you were involved in one such very successful online generated action around HMOS a couple of years back. That intervention and others like it would never have happened without an online space to set things going.

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on October 31, 2012 at 14:58

Alan in one of your recent posts you mentioned politicians' sometime feelings of cognitive disonance. I'm wondering if this post is a manifestation of same? And I do wonder if, on reflection, you can remain proud of belittling and minimising a resident's genuine concerns?

Many residents are busy. Do councillors have responsibility for services? Should experienced councilors and especially councilors of the majority group be accountable for services provided by the council?

In our partly dysfunctional system, who should be most responsible? (especially, in ending the dysfunction)

Who has authority? Who's in charge? (please, no sociology references!)

I'm sure the reading lists that you provide with every other post are not always attempts at distraction. But on this occasion, the relevance of the esteemed Mr Bion is not as immediately apparent to me as it is to you!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by adamvietnam on October 31, 2012 at 12:11

Thanks all -

Will see if they collect today. It feels like they're angling for making recycling collections fortnightly too which will either mean more mountainous bins outside our houses or less recycling as people have to use the black bins when when green ones get full.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by hob on October 31, 2012 at 13:49

No problem on Seymour Road. We seem to have had a fairly smooth changeover in my opinion. Do we have someone "important" living on the road or something?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Neville Collins on October 31, 2012 at 18:32

The first test of the new system (in my area) is that collections for both recycling and refuse are due to take place tomorrow.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page