Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey seeking to save money on rubbish collections?
Thanks to Geoff from Woodlands Park RA for surfacing a poorly publicised 'consultation' on rubbish collection, the wording of which makes it seem very likely that the council are considering making savings on waste collection.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Sarah on
-
It's to check they have responses from a representative sample of the population. It's good practice when doing a survey.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Sarah, I'm unclear which "it's" you are replying to. If the plain English clarity of your sentence is what the survey's equalities questions aim to test, then this aim is not stated plainly in the survey.
Instead, Equalities Monitoring - 13. has the paragraph I quote below which seems to pivot on "protected characteristics". (Nine currently, but - according to some legal websites, caselaw means they are evolving.)
-
-
The paragraph headed Equalities Monitoring in Section 13 of the Haringey survey. So people don't have to jump to and fro.
"We want to understand as much as we can about the potential equality impact of any changes to recycling and waste services on residents who share protected characteristics (for example, sex, disability, age or ethnicity). Please tell us if you think there things that we should or should not consider in the future, with equalities considerations in mind."
(Perhaps the author(s) know this is a potential minefield, so avoid plain English? Instead veiling the meaning.)
-
Permalink Reply by Don on
-
Sarah — I understand the wish to show responses from a representative cross-section of the population, but I’d argue for proportionality: as I said above, I can’t see how sexual orientation might bear on a waste collection survey (if it was about health issues, for instance, then it could of course be relevant), and — unless I’m missing something — the survey is only available in English, which may immediately disadvantage those people whose first language is something else. Of course. all this presupposes that the council will take any notice, anyway. I also see that Cllr Chandwani hasn’t responded to my direct question above about the relevance of some of the monitoring questions, despite expressing a wish for “greater awareness”; perhaps an official explanation would be useful?
-
-
Perhaps the frequency of waste removal is being reduced to pay for renaming Black Boy Lane.
-
-
Thanks to Hugh Flouch and Geoff Amabilino for passing on the news about this survey. Which I hadn't heard about.
In good faith I started ticking the little "engagement" circles. But abandoned it when I found it poorly structured. irritating and obfuscating.
More important, there seemed to be a herd of "elephants present in the room". All vital; many controversial; most embarrassingly obvious but unspoken and avoided. I'm prepared to discuss these issues calmly. civilly and rationally. But I'm fed up with pretending.
At minimum residents could and should have been provided with access to the background context and thinking about waste issues. One small example: the survey states that they have "engaged with other boroughs to see how they provide cleansing services and would like to understand how much you agree or disagree with the following initiatives". Which boroughs? What "initiatives" have been tried? With what outcomes?
Are these mainly about making cuts? If so I wish they'd be honest. Is this really about "cleaner and greener"? Or just leaner and meaner?
Dumped Waste. I was a councillor when Veolia got the waste contract. The Veolia reps mentioned another London Borough which was spending millions on waste trucks always out clearing street dumping. I live in East Tottenham and street dumping collection remains an important - and presumably very costly - part of the waste "system".
Recycling? Not to be in favour of recycling would be weird. But how many people had their confidence shaken when learning how much rubbish was in fact dumped on poorer countries under the pretence of helping to save the planet? Certainly mine was.
-
Permalink Reply by cuckoo on
-
Completed - thanks for bringing it to our attention. Do be careful as it seems whoever designed this survey is an expert in weasel-worded, confusion-inducing mayhem. I'm sure I'm not the only respondent who had to go back and check I'd ticked the correct Agree/Disagree box, particularly under Section 9 looking at the future waste collection options we'd prefer. The way it is worded with such a long list of competing options also seems to create a situation where someone can easily tick 'Agree' to two opposing options. It gives me very little faith in the process and I fear the Council will use any confusion to steamroller through what they've already decided upon. How about some Civic Pride - weekly collections for all waste and recycling, provision of sufficient domestic and street bins, plus deterrents for littering, fly-tipping and any other acts which encourage vermin? In addition, why not pledge to clear up quickly any kind of littering (regardless of who's 'fault' it is) in order to have a clean and sanitary area to be proud of. And, of course, to give the bin personnel enough time for their rounds and a decent wage so they can replace domestic bins where they belong rather than leaving them out on the street creating all sorts of hazards and other problems - pride in the job, pride in the community.
-
Permalink Reply by KP on
-
I agree cuckoo the survey seemed designed to trick people. They ask the same question in different ways so it's easy to tick the wrong option. Is it to prove that the people of the borough are stupid so can't be trusted to make sound decisions of things like bin collection and recycling?
-
-
Interesting "Cuckoo" that you mention Civic Pride, Years ago that phrase was a councillor's suggestion for a campaign. But it was dumbed-down by senior staff and given the name "Better Haringey". A large number of new street bins were badged with this slogan. At the time "Nudge Theory" was fashionable with the notion that having a bin a short distance away would make it easier to bin stuff. And therefore less likely to get litter on the streets / parks / greens / alleys etc
Liz Ixer's photo from May 2008 show what happened.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mrs_eds/2520868068/
Liz posted this in a photo album from a single month.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mrs_eds/albums/72157604949486591
You may - quite reasonably - reply that the answer is more bins or more frequent emptying. In which case I'd suggest viewing Ben Elton's famous bins video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0bUbki0dgY
-
-
Thank you for drawing attention to this as I am afraid I was unaware of it. I have now completed it. I have added the comment that I think the suggestion of putting waste and recycling bins on pavements outside properties is absolutely wrong as it is a hazard to people who are blind, disabled and/or users of mobility scooters and such a policy would therefore place the council in breach of anti-discrimination legislation.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
