Bags of rubbish
Summary
- There are 33 posts — by 17 authors — in this topic.
-
Posts with files From File Date Stephanie Jenkins 2009 Jul 27 07:02 UTC - Latest post made by Rachael Farnsworth at 2009 Jul 29 12:17 UTC
We have just had a leaflet from the City Council entitled âBin all your rubbishâ, saying âFrom 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no longer collect excess rubbish place by the side or on top of your green wheelie bin.â I thought that this was supposed to be the case anyway, but this is formal notification under Section 46(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (1990) that anyone leaving a bag of rubbish beside their wheelie bin (or a total of more than four lilac sacks) will now be subject to a fixed penalty notice of £80. What provision is going to be made for student houses, where they dump all their excess rubbish to be collected in the front garden rather than on the pavement? Unless and until these sacks becomes a hazard, people canât be fined for leaving bags on their own property can they? But if the city council doesnât pick these sacks up, what a terrible sight Headington will be. And at the end of the year students quite understandably all have a lot to throw away, and a single wheelie bin will never be big enough for up to five individuals having a clear-out at the same time. Is the city council really going to leave all the waste lying outside student houses over the summer while they try in vain to fine the vanished tenants?
Stephanie, you missed the bit about the wheelie bin lid must be closed. quote All non-recyclable rubbish must be contained in your green wheelie bin with the lid closed endquote That last bag in the bin can prop the lid open a bit! Also, bins and boxes must be left at the boundary of your property by 7am and not before 6pm the previous day. And here's the laugh After collection the wheelie bin will be returned to the same position. To start with, one the operatives goes round pulling the wheelie bins into the road and after emptying they are left on the pavement not necessarily outside one's home. As for a missed collection, our wheelie bin was missed once and when I rang about it the man didn't even ask for my address, I did tell him, but nothing happened.
They'll discover the easy solution. Simply leave your excess rubbish next to *someone else's* bins.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, <email obscured>> wrote: > We have just had a leaflet from the City Council entitled “Bin all your > rubbish, saying “From 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no longer > collect excess rubbish place by the side or on top of your green wheelie > bin.> > I thought that this was supposed to be the case anyway, but this is formal > notification under Section 46(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (1990) > that anyone leaving a bag of rubbish beside their wheelie bin (or a total of > more than four lilac sacks) will now be subject to a fixed penalty notice of > £80. > > What provision is going to be made for student houses, where they dump all > their excess rubbish to be collected in the front garden rather than on the > pavement? Unless and until these sacks becomes a hazard, people can’t be > fined for leaving bags on their own property can they? But if the city > council doesn’t pick these sacks up, what a terrible sight Headington will > be. > > And at the end of the year students quite understandably all have a lot to > throw away, and a single wheelie bin will never be big enough for up to five > individuals having a clear-out at the same time. Is the city council really > going to leave all the waste lying outside student houses over the summer > while they try in vain to fine the vanished tenants? > > Stephanie Jenkins > Headington ward, Oxford > Info about Stephanie Jenkins: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/stephaniejenkins > > View all messages on this topic at: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2I9lzPGa707nADITDWqFeB > ----------------------------------------- > To post, e-mail: <email obscured> > Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" > in subject, then send to: <email obscured> > > More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood > Forum: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules > ----------------------------------------- > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net >
From:
David "inconsistent moderation on these fora is an ongoing problem, and others are tampering with my profile via E-Democ" Hearn
Date:
2009 Jul 25 11:20 UTC
[Oops again - here was me getting paranoid with David's post about censorship until I realized I had only clicked "reply" to Nigel rather than "reply all"] Time to open up waste collection to proper competition I'd say. These people are your servants not your masters. You are their customers. You pay them. They take these excuses, such as land fill regulations or health and safety assessments, and turn them into rules that have the effect of new laws that can be enforceable with punishment fines and make your life inconvenient. It seems to me there is plenty of room for a premium service for example; one that will actually come onto your property, round to your kitchen door if necessary, to get your bin, wash it out when they've emptied it and put it back neatly; one that will give you a scale of charges so you know you will be billed by weight or volume (and not "fined" which by definition is a punishment) but will take whatever you leave for them; one that promises not to go through your rubbish bins in the dead of night categorizing you, not your rubbish, by some new socio-economic measure and treat you differently as a result; ones that come on different days and you can open accounts with more than one of them so that if you have something particular you want rid of one day that isn't your main collection they will take it anyway and bill you a little; one which will pay you for any recyclable waste for which they get money upstream - indeed I know of one firm dealing in a plastic bottle crusher who does just that - sends you bags that you can send back full of crushed PET bottles and get money back off them, eventually paying back the cost of the crusher and then some. All over the country council bureaucrats are being metamorphosized into "refuse tzars" (nice pun - for of course what they do is "refuse" to take your refuse except under ever stricter rules); and some day these pavlovian conditioned customers are going to bite back. You wait; after the "fines" will come the "SWAT" teams to haul you out and embarrass you in front of your neighbours - because monopolies, especially ones with statutory force, can do that sort of thing. "Public servants" - pah! Ah well, we can but hope. Why *do* all of you who have to work to their rules just roll over and accept this escalation of hostilities, this change of role from servant to policeman? You just watch what happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are no longer giving the service your tax pays for! Maybe, in future, someone will quip: "First, they came for the extra bin bags, but I said nothing, because I didn't have extra bin bags" Oh - by the way - be careful what you flush down the loo too - I was reading this week of some research in Oregon where they were testing equipment intended to check for drugs use by sampling sewer water. By the time they've got us all on their DNA database, they'll be able to match that with individuals and potentially use it for evidence (but don't assume it will stop at drugs - if there's too much sugar shown the diabetes SWAT team will land in your back garden and steal all your cakes no doubt).
Jock On 25 Jul 2009, at 09:19, Nigel Magnay wrote: > They'll discover the easy solution. > Simply leave your excess rubbish next to *someone else's* bins. > > > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, <email obscured>> wrote: > >> We have just had a leaflet from the City Council entitled “Bin all >> your >> rubbish, saying “From 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no >> longer >> collect excess rubbish place by the side or on top of your green >> wheelie >> bin.> >> I thought that this was supposed to be the case anyway, but this is >> formal >> notification under Section 46(1) of the Environmental Protection >> Act (1990) >> that anyone leaving a bag of rubbish beside their wheelie bin (or a >> total of >> more than four lilac sacks) will now be subject to a fixed penalty >> notice of >> £80. >> >> What provision is going to be made for student houses, where they >> dump all >> their excess rubbish to be collected in the front garden rather >> than on the >> pavement? Unless and until these sacks becomes a hazard, people >> can’t be >> fined for leaving bags on their own property can they? But if the >> city >> council doesn’t pick these sacks up, what a terrible sight >> Headington will >> be. >> >> And at the end of the year students quite understandably all have a >> lot to >> throw away, and a single wheelie bin will never be big enough for >> up to five >> individuals having a clear-out at the same time. Is the city >> council really >> going to leave all the waste lying outside student houses over the >> summer >> while they try in vain to fine the vanished tenants? >> >> Stephanie Jenkins -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me
> You just watch what happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are no longer giving the service your tax pays for I think my position in the circumstances of the "bin overfilled by 4 cm" case would be that "some person or persons unknown have deposited rubbish in your bin". *I* don't own it, I'm only the designated keeper. Since anything personally identifiable these days would be paper anyway (and in a separate box) - how is one going to prove beyond reasonable doubt my guilt? What next - "bin locks" ? It seems quite bizarre to me that we're moving, as you say, from service provision to an entirely more confrontational relationship between council and citizen [1]. And, like many other areas, I think that the basic problem is that the citizens simply *don't agree* with the solutions. This only really makes sense in the wider context of what's coming - the charging of refuse collection by weight. This is something that the council has "no plans" to do, by which they mean that they have every plan to do, which asking the ludicrously biassed "consultative" (ack, spit) question of "do you think it would be a good idea to give a discount to those households that throw away less rubbish?" gives the lie to. It's ludicrous because we all know taxes never go down, only up - nobody would get a discount, only some would pay the same, everyone else would be paying more. So - steps to achieve this goal that they have "no plans" to do, aka Slowly Boiling the Frog : 1) Make everyone use uniformly sized bins that can be integrated with a standardized weighscale on the truck. - check 2) Make sure those bins have RFID tags[1] in them, so you can tell, automatically, whose waste it is, and who to bill. - check 3) "Prime the way" by performing facetious "consultation" questions based on a false premise - check. 4) Ensure that everyone is using the standard issue units, and forbid the use of anything else. This is a key step, so issue large fines to force this through. <-- *You are here*. 5) Activate the infrastructure, calculate how much extra revenue you could soak up, commence billing. Seems to me that we're quite far along a path for something there were no plans to do. The flip side of the coin is of course all the *bad* side-effects that effectively discouraging people from using the efficient infrastructure for waste removal that we have generated: 1) I'm going to put more food waste through an insinkerator and through the sewerage system. Thames water won't be too happy, but heck, this isn't Bethselamin.. 2) I'm going to burn anything I can 3) I'm going to make more use of the tip (I've seen people using this option right now because of fortnightly collections, being unwilling to have rotting food waste in their terraced houses). From those willing to go further, I'd expect to see 1) A lot of "would you mind terribly if we just popped this in your bin" awkwardness 2) An increase in dumping of waste in other people's bins (see above) 3) A massive increase in fly-tipping (which is a problem now, *even though all you have to do is drive to the tip*!) - gee - that's sensible - prevent people from using a working refuse collection system, and simultaneously have to deal with the consequences All totally insane. But then. There are no plans, are there? [1] I feel like I'm living in the Simpsons episode... Springfield will have its first annual "Do What You Feel" Festival this Saturday, whenever you feel like showing up! It'll be a welcome change from our annual, "Do As We Say" Festival started by German settlers in 1946. [2] When I learned this, my thoughts immediately turned to http://is.gd/1LX6b . "The RFID-Zapper might cause you to feel armed against companies or governments trying to compromise your privacy. You might even experience euphoria, especially when destroying RFID-Tags. This could lead to dangerous behavior, like speaking your mind, using freedom of speech, fighting for your rights, all of which are bound to ultimately lead to the communist world revolution ;-)" On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Jock Coats <email obscured>> wrote: > > Time to open up waste collection to proper competition I'd say. > > These people are your servants not your masters. You are their customers. You pay them. They take these excuses, such as land fill regulations or health and safety assessments, and turn them into rules that have the effect of new laws that can be enforceable with punishment fines and make your life inconvenient. > > It seems to me there is plenty of room for a premium service for example; one that will actually come onto your property, round to your kitchen door if necessary, to get your bin, wash it out when they've emptied it and put it back neatly; one that will give you a scale of charges so you know you will be billed by weight or volume (and not "fined" which by definition is a punishment) but will take whatever you leave for them; one that promises not to go through your rubbish bins in the dead of night categorizing you, not your rubbish, by some new socio-economic measure and treat you differently as a result; ones that come on different days and you can open accounts with more than one of them so that if you have something particular you want rid of one day that isn't your main collection they will take it anyway and bill you a little; one which will pay you for any recyclable waste for which they get money upstream - indeed I know of one firm dealing in a plastic bottle crusher who does just that - sends you bags that you can send back full of crushed PET bottles and get money back off them, eventually paying back the cost of the crusher and then some. > > All over the country council bureaucrats are being metamorphosized into "refuse tzars" (nice pun - for of course what they do is "refuse" to take your refuse except under ever stricter rules); and some day these pavlovian conditioned customers are going to bite back. You wait; after the "fines" will come the "SWAT" teams to haul you out and embarrass you in front of your neighbours - because monopolies, especially ones with statutory force, can do that sort of thing. "Public servants" - pah! > > Ah well, we can but hope. Why *do* all of you who have to work to their rules just roll over and accept this escalation of hostilities, this change of role from servant to policeman? You just watch what happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are no longer giving the service your tax pays for! > > Maybe, in future, someone will quip: > > "First, they came for the extra bin bags, but I said nothing, because I didn't have extra bin bags" > > Oh - by the way - be careful what you flush down the loo too - I was reading this week of some research in Oregon where they were testing equipment intended to check for drugs use by sampling sewer water. By the time they've got us all on their DNA database, they'll be able to match that with individuals and potentially use it for evidence (but don't assume it will stop at drugs - if there's too much sugar shown the diabetes SWAT team will land in your back garden and steal all your cakes no doubt).
> > Jock > > On 25 Jul 2009, at 09:19, Nigel Magnay wrote: > >> They'll discover the easy solution. >> Simply leave your excess rubbish next to *someone else's* bins. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, <email obscured>> wrote: >> >>> We have just had a leaflet from the City Council entitled “Bin all your >>> rubbish, saying “From 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no longer >>> collect excess rubbish place by the side or on top of your green wheelie >>> bin.> >>> I thought that this was supposed to be the case anyway, but this is formal >>> notification under Section 46(1) of the Environmental Protection Act (1990) >>> that anyone leaving a bag of rubbish beside their wheelie bin (or a total of >>> more than four lilac sacks) will now be subject to a fixed penalty notice of >>> £80. >>> >>> What provision is going to be made for student houses, where they dump all >>> their excess rubbish to be collected in the front garden rather than on the >>> pavement? Unless and until these sacks becomes a hazard, people can’t be >>> fined for leaving bags on their own property can they? But if the city >>> council doesn’t pick these sacks up, what a terrible sight Headington will >>> be. >>> >>> And at the end of the year students quite understandably all have a lot to >>> throw away, and a single wheelie bin will never be big enough for up to five >>> individuals having a clear-out at the same time. Is the city council really >>> going to leave all the waste lying outside student houses over the summer >>> while they try in vain to fine the vanished tenants? >>> >>> Stephanie Jenkins > > -- > Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 > Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF > m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call > <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me >
I'm still waiting for a replacement wheelie bin (mine was stolen, with rubbish still inside, some weeks ago). When the leaflet came I called the relevant department at the council to ask what would happen to my rubbish bag since I have as yet no sight of the promised replacement bin. It was explained that the bins were made abroad (er - why is that then, and what's happening to all the plastic in the recycling boxes? Is it sent abroad - carbon footprint notwithstanding - for recycling into wheelie bins which are then reimported into this country?) and that there is a dearth of 140 litre bins: I'd have to have a 180 litre one. When I explained that I generate two to three carrier bags' worth of non-recyclable rubbish every fortnight which would barely cover the floor of a 180 litre bin I was told that once the smaller ones were finally sourced I could have it swapped for one of those. In the meantime it's carefully explained exactly when and where the wheelie bin should be put out. The time restrictions are ridiculous. What if you're going away? Are you supposed to leave your trash to ferment while you're on holiday? Also, when I first arrived in Barton the binmen (or whatever socially correct term I should refer to them by) would happily come down the alley behind our terrace, pick up the big, heavy metal dustbins, and take them to the kerb. Now that the bins have wheels, making them soooooooo much easier to move, we are no longer allowed to hide them prettily at the back, but are supposed to have them, disgustingly, by our front doors. Why are these regulations being forced on us? It smacks of control-freakery beyond endurance. Jock points out that 'these people are your servants not your masters' but there's no evidence of that. Every 'consultation' - such as residents' permit charges - is a sham in which no notice is taken of the people's voice. For instance, when turning left off the bypass into Cutteslowe was made illegal, every household in the area was given a vote on whether to keep it so or return it to a legal turnoff, but with the proviso that if they didn't vote, it would be counted as a vote to keep the turn illegal. Hello? Excuse me? Since when did an abstention turn into a yes-vote? Is that local (or any) democracy? Once they begin weighing our bins, I want a bloody great refund for hardly having any non-recyclable trash, please. A huge one. In cash, in an envelope, thanks. As for sampling sewer water, in this observation-obsessed age I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't doing it already. I'm waiting for the cameras to be sneaked inside my house so they can make sure I behave properly, don't lick the plate or pick my nose, eat up my greens and the other four of my five-a-day, and go to bed on time, soberly and decorously, having first washed behind my ears. Cynical? Oh, I think so! PG ----- Original Message ----- From: Jock Coats To: Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 12:44 PM Subject: Re: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish [Oops again - here was me getting paranoid with David's post about censorship until I realized I had only clicked "reply" to Nigel rather than "reply all"] Time to open up waste collection to proper competition I'd say. These people are your servants not your masters. You are their customers. You pay them. They take these excuses, such as land fill regulations or health and safety assessments, and turn them into rules that have the effect of new laws that can be enforceable with punishment fines and make your life inconvenient. It seems to me there is plenty of room for a premium service for example; one that will actually come onto your property, round to your kitchen door if necessary, to get your bin, wash it out when they've emptied it and put it back neatly; one that will give you a scale of charges so you know you will be billed by weight or volume (and not "fined" which by definition is a punishment) but will take whatever you leave for them; one that promises not to go through your rubbish bins in the dead of night categorizing you, not your rubbish, by some new socio-economic measure and treat you differently as a result; ones that come on different days and you can open accounts with more than one of them so that if you have something particular you want rid of one day that isn't your main collection they will take it anyway and bill you a little; one which will pay you for any recyclable waste for which they get money upstream - indeed I know of one firm dealing in a plastic bottle crusher who does just that - sends you bags that you can send back full of crushed PET bottles and get money back off them, eventually paying back the cost of the crusher and then some. All over the country council bureaucrats are being metamorphosized into "refuse tzars" (nice pun - for of course what they do is "refuse" to take your refuse except under ever stricter rules); and some day these pavlovian conditioned customers are going to bite back. You wait; after the "fines" will come the "SWAT" teams to haul you out and embarrass you in front of your neighbours - because monopolies, especially ones with statutory force, can do that sort of thing. "Public servants" - pah! Ah well, we can but hope. Why *do* all of you who have to work to their rules just roll over and accept this escalation of hostilities, this change of role from servant to policeman? You just watch what happens when you don't pay these "fines" on the grounds that they are no longer giving the service your tax pays for! Maybe, in future, someone will quip: "First, they came for the extra bin bags, but I said nothing, because I didn't have extra bin bags" Oh - by the way - be careful what you flush down the loo too - I was reading this week of some research in Oregon where they were testing equipment intended to check for drugs use by sampling sewer water. By the time they've got us all on their DNA database, they'll be able to match that with individuals and potentially use it for evidence (but don't assume it will stop at drugs - if there's too much sugar shown the diabetes SWAT team will land in your back garden and steal all your cakes no doubt). Jock On 25 Jul 2009, at 09:19, Nigel Magnay wrote: > They'll discover the easy solution. > Simply leave your excess rubbish next to *someone else's* bins. > > > > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 8:21 AM, <email obscured>> wrote: > >> We have just had a leaflet from the City Council entitled “Bin all >> your >> rubbish, saying “From 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no >> longer >> collect excess rubbish place by the side or on top of your green >> wheelie >> bin.> >> I thought that this was supposed to be the case anyway, but this is >> formal >> notification under Section 46(1) of the Environmental Protection >> Act (1990) >> that anyone leaving a bag of rubbish beside their wheelie bin (or a >> total of >> more than four lilac sacks) will now be subject to a fixed penalty >> notice of >> £80. >> >> What provision is going to be made for student houses, where they >> dump all >> their excess rubbish to be collected in the front garden rather >> than on the >> pavement? Unless and until these sacks becomes a hazard, people >> can’t be >> fined for leaving bags on their own property can they? But if the >> city >> council doesn’t pick these sacks up, what a terrible sight >> Headington will >> be. >> >> And at the end of the year students quite understandably all have a >> lot to >> throw away, and a single wheelie bin will never be big enough for >> up to five >> individuals having a clear-out at the same time. Is the city >> council really >> going to leave all the waste lying outside student houses over the >> summer >> while they try in vain to fine the vanished tenants? >> >> Stephanie Jenkins -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me Jock Coats Headington/Marston - Headington Hill, Oxford Info about Jock Coats: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/jockcoats View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5B08vYiVKpfpRoaGXMraY ----------------------------------------- To post, e-mail: <email obscured> Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" in subject, then send to: <email obscured> More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules ----------------------------------------- Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.29/2261 - Release Date: 07/25/09 05:58:00
I haven't seen this wonderful leaflet yet - but reading the above comments does this mean I'll be fined if someone leaves a sack by my bin? How far from my bin does the sack have to be in order that I avoid the fine?? Forgive my levity - but I agree surely this just means more fly tipping...
On 25 Jul 2009, at 15:04, Pippa Gwilliam wrote: > Jock points out that 'these people are your servants not your > masters' but there's no evidence of that. Every 'consultation' - > such as residents' permit charges - is a sham in which no notice is > taken of the people's voice. For instance, when turning left off > the bypass into Cutteslowe was made illegal, every household in the > area was given a vote on whether to keep it so or return it to a > legal turnoff, but with the proviso that if they didn't vote, it > would be counted as a vote to keep the turn illegal. Hello? > Excuse me? Since when did an abstention turn into a yes-vote? Is > that local (or any) democracy? Personally I hope we are entering the beginning of the end for this "democratic" system that is no better than two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. Forget for a moment the anomaly that no member of the county's "ruling" party represents the city, though that is bad in itself. Participation, in the minimal form of voting, seems to be interpreted as consent to whatever form the social contract may take after the elections regardless of whether one voted in favour of it or not, which again is bad enough. But we have reached the point where regularly a minority of potential voters even bother to participate even to that extent, so not only do we have the repugnant situation where a minority of those who do vote, because of our first past the post system, actually favour the "winning" outcome, but that that even represents a minority of the minority that do vote. The trouble is the system itself feels that this grants it a mandate, by discounting the non-views of the majority that don't vote. It assumes that by not voting those people are tacitly consenting also to whatever outcome the minority that do vote decide upon - the old "if they wanted to complain they'd vote" canard. This is an assumption too far in my opinion. But what to do about it? How to indicate you do not consent whilst not actually participating and thereby indicating your consent? It seems to me from questioning people on the doorstep that most of those who say they are unlikely to vote do so because they feel that "you are all the same", "it doesn't matter who wins you'll do it anyway" (whatever "it" is) or variations on that theme. In the absence of real reform, the only thing I can think of is to campaign for all those who do not regularly vote to consider using their vote but spoiling their ballot paper. Whilst spoilt papers measure in the tens usually at most at a ward level, imagine the embarrassment of winning if you knew that there were more spoilt papers than the winner, or even than all the other votes cast for any of the candidates? The headlines one could make out of "spoilt papers beat winning candidate". Something has to give this self-perpetuating minority controlled "democracy" a right metaphorical kicking somehow to highlight just how unrepresentative it is; how it goes around imposing new systems, backed by fines, courts and eventually imprisonment, on the basis of a mandate from a minority of a minority. Merely voting for another party using the same system is not really any better. By themselves participating in that system each party is complicit in it - they are saying "if we win, regardless of whether we get a minority of a minority backing us, we will control this system for the time being" - they may offer a little less interference or a little more interference, a little more honest consultation or a little less honest consultation, a little more taken from your pocket for their schemes or a little less taken from your pocket for their schemes, but all are playing under the same set of rules that means that far more people do not agree with the end result than expressly do vote for the end result. We need new institutions, built from the people as individual upwards, not imposed by the political classes downwards. The primary level of governance is the individual, or the individual household. The next is co-operation amongst those we share certain needs with - our street, or our children's school (and these need not be the same governing institutions either), and only when there is something these very local levels of governance cannot achieve efficiently should they be allowed to collaborate with other neighbourhoods to deliver some bigger co-ordinated project. Mind you, that also means that we must have the courage to stop going to the highest level possible and demanding that "something must be done". For everything that "must be done" we should start exploring whether it can be done by ourselves, or co-operatively with our neighbours, instead of relying on this system to do it for us.
Jock -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me
I was torn off a while back by a local councillor for using the Forum for party political points. I have apologised to Stephanie and others for that, but the latest round of correspondence seem to be taking specific policy positions that seem to have a definite Party flavour. Either we do or we don't accept the rules of the Forum. I stood back so I do not see why others should be allowed to proceed. Roy Darke
> From: <email obscured> > To: <email obscured> > Subject: Re: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish > Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 00:57:06 +0100 > > On 25 Jul 2009, at 15:04, Pippa Gwilliam wrote: > > > Jock points out that 'these people are your servants not your > > masters' but there's no evidence of that. Every 'consultation' - > > such as residents' permit charges - is a sham in which no notice is > > taken of the people's voice. For instance, when turning left off > > the bypass into Cutteslowe was made illegal, every household in the > > area was given a vote on whether to keep it so or return it to a > > legal turnoff, but with the proviso that if they didn't vote, it > > would be counted as a vote to keep the turn illegal. Hello? > > Excuse me? Since when did an abstention turn into a yes-vote? Is > > that local (or any) democracy? > > > Personally I hope we are entering the beginning of the end for this > "democratic" system that is no better than two wolves and a sheep > voting on what's for dinner. Forget for a moment the anomaly that no > member of the county's "ruling" party represents the city, though that > is bad in itself. Participation, in the minimal form of voting, seems > to be interpreted as consent to whatever form the social contract may > take after the elections regardless of whether one voted in favour of > it or not, which again is bad enough. > > But we have reached the point where regularly a minority of potential > voters even bother to participate even to that extent, so not only do > we have the repugnant situation where a minority of those who do vote, > because of our first past the post system, actually favour the > "winning" outcome, but that that even represents a minority of the > minority that do vote. > > The trouble is the system itself feels that this grants it a mandate, > by discounting the non-views of the majority that don't vote. It > assumes that by not voting those people are tacitly consenting also to > whatever outcome the minority that do vote decide upon - the old "if > they wanted to complain they'd vote" canard. This is an assumption > too far in my opinion. But what to do about it? How to indicate you > do not consent whilst not actually participating and thereby > indicating your consent? It seems to me from questioning people on > the doorstep that most of those who say they are unlikely to vote do > so because they feel that "you are all the same", "it doesn't matter > who wins you'll do it anyway" (whatever "it" is) or variations on that > theme. > > In the absence of real reform, the only thing I can think of is to > campaign for all those who do not regularly vote to consider using > their vote but spoiling their ballot paper. Whilst spoilt papers > measure in the tens usually at most at a ward level, imagine the > embarrassment of winning if you knew that there were more spoilt > papers than the winner, or even than all the other votes cast for any > of the candidates? The headlines one could make out of "spoilt papers > beat winning candidate". > > Something has to give this self-perpetuating minority controlled > "democracy" a right metaphorical kicking somehow to highlight just how > unrepresentative it is; how it goes around imposing new systems, > backed by fines, courts and eventually imprisonment, on the basis of a > mandate from a minority of a minority. > > Merely voting for another party using the same system is not really > any better. By themselves participating in that system each party is > complicit in it - they are saying "if we win, regardless of whether we > get a minority of a minority backing us, we will control this system > for the time being" - they may offer a little less interference or a > little more interference, a little more honest consultation or a > little less honest consultation, a little more taken from your pocket > for their schemes or a little less taken from your pocket for their > schemes, but all are playing under the same set of rules that means > that far more people do not agree with the end result than expressly > do vote for the end result. > > We need new institutions, built from the people as individual upwards, > not imposed by the political classes downwards. The primary level of > governance is the individual, or the individual household. The next > is co-operation amongst those we share certain needs with - our > street, or our children's school (and these need not be the same > governing institutions either), and only when there is something these > very local levels of governance cannot achieve efficiently should they > be allowed to collaborate with other neighbourhoods to deliver some > bigger co-ordinated project. Mind you, that also means that we must > have the courage to stop going to the highest level possible and > demanding that "something must be done". For everything that "must be > done" we should start exploring whether it can be done by ourselves, > or co-operatively with our neighbours, instead of relying on this > system to do it for us. > > Jock > -- > Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 > Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF > m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call > <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me > > > Jock Coats > Headington/Marston - Headington Hill, Oxford > Info about Jock Coats: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/jockcoats > > View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6G4wzRJvZN6uhQPVq0yPSn > ----------------------------------------- > To post, e-mail: <email obscured> > Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" > in subject, then send to: <email obscured> > > More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules > ----------------------------------------- > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net _________________________________________________________________ Share your memories online with anyone you want. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/
This thread does seem to have become rather political. As changing the new city council policy (let alone the whole political system) is not an option, maybe we can go back to discussing the immediate problems that it is going to bring to an area with a large number of students. What happens if students move into a house which has no recycling boxes? And how are they supposed to know what goes in which box? (It is not obvious: I would expect a large green wheelie bin with "Recycle for Oxford" plastered on the side to be a recycling bin, for instance.) If the city council refuses to collect rubbish placed beside the bins, how are students who do not have cars supposed to deal with it as it starts to build up and fester?
On 26 Jul 2009, at 21:18, <email obscured> wrote: > This thread does seem to have become rather political. Though despite protestations to the contrary, not "party" political. My post was more a "plague on all your houses" (and explicitly said so at one point - how else is one supposed to read "Merely voting for another party using the same system is not really any better. By themselves participating in that system each party is complicit in it"?). Nonetheless on your substantive point... > What happens if students move into a house which has no recycling > boxes? And how are they supposed to know what goes in which box? > (It is not obvious: I would expect a large green wheelie bin with > "Recycle for Oxford" plastered on the side to be a recycling bin, > for instance.) Perhaps the city needs to get in touch with landlords and agents - especially any who are registered under the multi-occupancy registration scheme - and put the onus on them to ensure that when a tenancy commences they have the complete set. As regards Brookes students, the majority of them will have spent their first year in halls of residence. The recycling regime in place in halls of residence (which I think is also replicated in Oxford University hall type accommodation) is designed to introduce them to the city's normal system for when they are living out. We do not have blue boxes, but do have blue bags. The main difference is that they can only put glass into the green boxes (because they are not sorted at the kerbside but deposited centrally in large glass bins that the council empties once a week) and plastic *and* paper into the blue bags. I think it will be more difficult if and when food waste is collected separately across the city - there is a limit to the number of receptacles we can reasonably get into the students' kitchens - but they will at least have been introduced to the basics of the system and should not really have an excuse for not at least replicating what they have had a year to get used to. Indeed, the Brookes system is somewhat more onerous than the general city-wide system - our students have to take their blue bags to a central comingled recycling compound and their green boxes to a collection point for each block. Only their residual waste is collected by hall staff from their flats. > If the city council refuses to collect rubbish placed beside the > bins, how are students who do not have cars supposed to deal with it > as it starts to build up and fester? I agree, though it is worth also saying that nearly a third of households on average across the country do not have access to a car; and they are predominantly the less well off and the elderly. Whilst it might be assumed that these groups are less likely also to overflow their bins, if they do they are the ones who are going to be disproportionately affected by a draconian punishment regime. Certainly if there really is no plan to weigh and charge, then a rethink on this fines policy is required - at least allowing discretion (and ensuring a personal visit and chat before punishment) and not simply slapping some penalty charge notice that could be more than a week's earnings for some and cause real distress.
Jock -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me
I REALLY don't like Jock's post about how "they are our servants". Actually: NO, they're human beings, doing a job, for not great pay. Say thank you to them - do you want to do it? I think he mistakes policy for implementation. The bin men (the aforementioned "servants") are merely implementing the policies set by the managers which have been agreed by council. Jock was on the council not so long ago, and given his posts, I suspect he'd like to be again some day. So don't shoot the messengers, shoot those who set the policies. He should know this! I'd like to make a couple of points: Before the council introduced the current collection service, there were months and months and months of panic and worry. When it actually came in, for most households, it wasn't THAT much of a big deal. It was actually pretty easy to understand what went in which box, and there were various helpful reminders about what to put out and when (I still get text reminders, but I don't actually need one now: I know from which box is fullest which week it is). Yes, it's a bit of a pain, and a bid unsightly and inconvenient. But I (and I think most people) understand why we need to recycle, and it isn't that much of a problem. I'd prefer not to have the boxes and bins clogging things up in the house and garden, but I'm generally pleased to offset my carbon footprint, and, thinking back, the black bags (so often split) were horrid, so for me it's worth it. There are minor inconveniences: the bins often aren't put back properly. But that's no more than a bore. I think it depends on your crew. In Marston, we generally have a great crew, who sort though, and take all the recycleables and who are sensible. There are crews who are jobsworths. But, mostly, it's a good service, which mostly works. For most people, I'd guess it's the same. It's much harder for those with no front garden, but there aren't that many of those in Oxford, or on this forum. Students are lazy, but I think they're the last generation. My 7 year old knows she has to recycle. It'll filter through. Landfill tax (the tax that has to be paid for rubbish that can not be recycled) is not a joke. If we landfill too much, there will be fines. This is a governmental thing. These fines will have to be paid by taxpayers. This means YOUR council taX. The council is RIGHT to try and stop us paying these taxes. Going back to "recycling is a good thing"... If you read your leaflet, you'll see that it talks about "persistent" offenders. This means if you go on holiday, or have a birthday, or some other one-0ff event that means you have an over-stuffed bin, you probably won't be fined. The council picks up our waste. Jock talked about the joy of outsourcing. How I hate it! To stand ANY chance of keeping control, k e e p i t i n - h o u s e. Once you've outsourced it, you lose all and any control. the right thing is to keep it in-house and make it right. There are VERY few things that deliver a service (no matter how much you criticise it, it's still a service that delivers to EVERY residence in the city every single week. how many other services can boast that!). If the service isn't right, then make it so. You (the council) own it. Once you give it away, you don't, and you're at their mercy. Look at the railways. Outsourcing is NOT THE answer. If you don't want to participate, you don't have to (we all pay towards all the services, and I don't use most of them. But I support the fact the council gives out benefits, etc). If you don't want to participate, go to Redbridge. Probably, people aren't reading now, but my key thing about this post is that the leaflet said "persistent" offenders. Basically, MOST people recycle. But there are pockets within the city that put out loads of side waste each week, and their blue and green boxes are empty. THOSE are the people the council wants to go after. Not the good resident who's gone on holiday, or had a party and had lots of extra waste because of a one-off event. There WILL be fines for the council if we don't recycle. So if the new policy makes people who currently don't recycle, recycle more, then it's a good thing. Isn't it? If you don't like it, dispose of your waste yourself. If you want to use the council services, then use them. It's not much of a big deal. Not for any of us. But, please, don't think of them as your servants. You aren't that important. Going on holiday now. Kate ex-city works policy officer. Now, not working for the council.
From:
David "inconsistent moderation on these fora is an ongoing problem, and others are tampering with my profile via E-Democ" Hearn
Date:
2009 Jul 26 23:03 UTC
Re Kate Stratford's comment: Most "operatives" are generally polite, efficient, satisfactory, and happy to be of service. They earn their wages well. Bin men (rarely much VISIBLE female employment in this job, inexplicably) are under high pressure to work too fast to be able to be meticulous (eg bin repositioning and cleaning up loose detritus). More need hiring. Management in enough people's experience has appeared less satisfactory. The managers are IMO too many in number and oversalaried, overpensioned. Reduce the surplus. Public service is the ideal that is too often poorly delivered (despite spin and propaganda suggesting otherwise) to hard-pressed service users and taxpayers. We rightly resent being treated with arrogant contempt, eg when we encounter undue obstructionism, disregard or patronage by bosses who may not be fit for purpose. Halve silly salaries for senior managers, and we'd get staff to fill posts still, and just as "good"!
Well said Kate; the Landfill Tax is not a joke. We can't go on landfilling with gay abandon, or we will run out of space in which to do so. A trip up the M40 to Ardley will confirm this. I personally prefer a wheelie-bin outside my [terraced, pavement-less] house then to have to stack up disgusting bin-bags in my back yard for a week and then carry them dripping through my house. Regards Noam Bleicher 078 1847 1655 056 0268 4870
> From: <email obscured> > Subject: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish > To: <email obscured> > Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:33:17 +1200 > > I REALLY don't like Jock's post about how "they are our servants". Actually: NO, they're human beings, doing a job, for not great pay. Say thank you to them - do you want to do it? > > I think he mistakes policy for implementation. The bin men (the aforementioned "servants") are merely implementing the policies set by the managers which have been agreed by council. Jock was on the council not so long ago, and given his posts, I suspect he'd like to be again some day. So don't shoot the messengers, shoot those who set the policies. He should know this! > > I'd like to make a couple of points: Before the council introduced the current collection service, there were months and months and months of panic and worry. When it actually came in, for most households, it wasn't THAT much of a big deal. It was actually pretty easy to understand what went in which box, and there were various helpful reminders about what to put out and when (I still get text reminders, but I don't actually need one now: I know from which box is fullest which week it is). Yes, it's a bit of a pain, and a bid unsightly and inconvenient. But I (and I think most people) understand why we need to recycle, and it isn't that much of a problem. I'd prefer not to have the boxes and bins clogging things up in the house and garden, but I'm generally pleased to offset my carbon footprint, and, thinking back, the black bags (so often split) were horrid, so for me it's worth it. There are minor inconveniences: the bins often aren't put back properly. B > ut that's no more than a bore. I think it depends on your crew. In Marston, we generally have a great crew, who sort though, and take all the recycleables and who are sensible. There are crews who are jobsworths. But, mostly, it's a good service, which mostly works. > > For most people, I'd guess it's the same. > > It's much harder for those with no front garden, but there aren't that many of those in Oxford, or on this forum. Students are lazy, but I think they're the last generation. My 7 year old knows she has to recycle. It'll filter through. > > Landfill tax (the tax that has to be paid for rubbish that can not be recycled) is not a joke. If we landfill too much, there will be fines. This is a governmental thing. These fines will have to be paid by taxpayers. This means YOUR council taX. The council is RIGHT to try and stop us paying these taxes. > Going back to "recycling is a good thing"... > > If you read your leaflet, you'll see that it talks about "persistent" offenders. This means if you go on holiday, or have a birthday, or some other one-0ff event that means you have an over-stuffed bin, you probably won't be fined. > > The council picks up our waste. Jock talked about the joy of outsourcing. How I hate it! To stand ANY chance of keeping control, k e e p i t i n - h o u s e. Once you've outsourced it, you lose all and any control. the right thing is to keep it in-house and make it right. There are VERY few things that deliver a service (no matter how much you criticise it, it's still a service that delivers to EVERY residence in the city every single week. how many other services can boast that!). If the service isn't right, then make it so. You (the council) own it. Once you give it away, you don't, and you're at their mercy. Look at the railways. Outsourcing is NOT THE answer. > > If you don't want to participate, you don't have to (we all pay towards all the services, and I don't use most of them. But I support the fact the council gives out benefits, etc). If you don't want to participate, go to Redbridge. > > Probably, people aren't reading now, but my key thing about this post is that the leaflet said "persistent" offenders. Basically, MOST people recycle. But there are pockets within the city that put out loads of side waste each week, and their blue and green boxes are empty. THOSE are the people the council wants to go after. Not the good resident who's gone on holiday, or had a party and had lots of extra waste because of a one-off event. > > There WILL be fines for the council if we don't recycle. > > So if the new policy makes people who currently don't recycle, recycle more, then it's a good thing. Isn't it? > > If you don't like it, dispose of your waste yourself. If you want to use the council services, then use them. It's not much of a big deal. Not for any of us. > > But, please, don't think of them as your servants. You aren't that important. > > Going on holiday now. > > Kate > ex-city works policy officer. > Now, not working for the council. > Kate Stratford > > Info about Kate Stratford: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/katestratford > > View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1JgR9YqsVKWiVofhP8jfJC > ----------------------------------------- > To post, e-mail: <email obscured> > Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" > in subject, then send to: <email obscured> > > More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules > ----------------------------------------- > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Messenger: Happy 10-Year Anniversaryget free winks and emoticons. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/157562755/direct/01/
I am not so worried about the fines (although I think they are unworkable) if that is what it takes to get people to recycle. I am worried about the categorical statement: "From 3 August 2009, Oxford City Council will no longer collect excess rubbish placed by the side or on top of your green wheelie bin" (see scan of front of leaflet, uploaded herewith).
The following file was added to this topic:
> Well said Kate; the Landfill Tax is not a joke. We can't go on landfilling with gay abandon, or we will run out of space in which to do so. A trip up the M40 to Ardley will confirm this. No. We are in *no way* running out of space in which to landfill; yes, we would need to commission new sites; yes there's good reasons to find alternatives (lechate, for one), but the "running out of space" argument is simply dishonest. Also, consider - economics tells you this to be so. If supply of landfill space was at such a premium, there wouldn't be any need to have a "landfill tax", because the precious space would be priced accordingly, and thus provide the economic incentive to find some other solution. > > I personally prefer a wheelie-bin outside my [terraced, pavement-less] house then to have to stack up disgusting bin-bags in my back yard for a week and then carry them dripping through my house. > By pavement-less do you mean your front door opens directly onto the road? If so aren't you a bit stuffed, given leaving your bin there outside of the "designated hours" will be punished by the Bin Polizei ?
On 26 Jul 2009, at 23:33, <email obscured> wrote: > I REALLY don't like Jock's post about how "they are our servants". > Actually: NO, they're human beings, doing a job, for not great > pay. Say thank you to them - do you want to do it? I apologize but I really do think you have misinterpreted or I have badly phrased. The council, all forms of governance, are our servants not our masters. Operatives are workers, doing what is set for them, even those who immediately set their rules for them are operating to parameters required of them from on high - whether it be the land fill tax directives or whatever - ultimately they are set by people *we* elect as *our* representatives, to *serve* us. There can be no other justification for collective government in my opinion - that it *serves* not *rules*. Yet all too often they operate far more by coercion than consent. Hence the creation of ever more regulation which is enforced by punishment rather than by contract, or, as in the case of Kent where they have been rummaging through bins and using the data to "profile" people (just to stay with the bins issue - there are many others of course), by imposition and invasion of privacy - other organization types would not get away with this treatment of the very people they are established to serve. > I think he mistakes policy for implementation. I don't think I do - it is "policy" to go about the "implementation" by coercion rather than incentive, say. To rely on punishment. Just where is the "carrot" in all this (apart from in the pilot food-waste project of course). > The bin men (the aforementioned "servants") are merely implementing > the policies set by the managers which have been agreed by council. > Jock was on the council not so long ago, and given his posts, I > suspect he'd like to be again some day. I very much doubt it. I have become a fairly convinced left- libertarian, a mutualist. I think the entire system sucks, from Europe, down through Westminster, to County, City and company. Precisely because it no longer *serves* but seeks to *rule*. > So don't shoot the messengers, shoot those who set the policies. > He should know this! Indeed, though that does not only mean the political classes, albeit that that is the primary target. There are senior levels of executive staff who promote and formulate these "good ideas" and how to implement them and who are therefore complicit in creating and perpetuating the mechanisms of coercion - our politicians are not clever enough to do that on their own! > If you read your leaflet, you'll see that it talks about > "persistent" offenders. This means if you go on holiday, or have a > birthday, or some other one-0ff event that means you have an over- > stuffed bin, you probably won't be fined. That "probably" is part of the problem though - it means that such punishments *could* be imposed, and it could be done quite arbitrarily. That is part of what makes a one-sided contract (one that one of the parties to which cannot refuse to accept, like this "social contract" we're all supposed to adhere to) so dangerous. > The council picks up our waste. Jock talked about the joy of > outsourcing. How I hate it! Actually I didn't. I talked about competition. Which is precisely not how the railways were handled, or PFI projects, or much else in the corporatization of government that has happened in the past thirty years. As you rightly point out these are often even worse than direct provision - privatizing the profits, usually to big corporations who are able to navigate the barriers that government puts up in the name of "best value" and so on, and socializing the problems. They all have monopolistic cash cows and no incentive for efficiency or innovation. > To stand ANY chance of keeping control, k e e p i t i n - h > o u s e. Once you've outsourced it, you lose all and any control. > the right thing is to keep it in-house and make it right. There > are VERY few things that deliver a service (no matter how much you > criticise it, it's still a service that delivers to EVERY residence > in the city every single week. how many other services can boast > that!). If the service isn't right, then make it so. You (the > council) own it. But that there's the problem with the whole system. It is a monopoly. With a byzantine process for bringing about change (even the minutest change), and even if you do achieve that, 49% of everyone may still disagree with you and want something different. But because as you say we pay for it whether we want it or not, that monopoly also has the inbuilt advantage of effectively being able to prevent any alternative ideas that people may pay for. And the response by the regime is to vilify that 49%, or worse, like Frances Kennet, make out they are bonkers. Who says "every residence, every week" in the best way to do it? For example I'm sure, given relatively cheap infrastructure, that many homes already have, one could imagine a system that orders a collection on demand when a bin is full, wirelessly, and for different types of waste. Once (and I assume it is when rather than if - since even if our council "has no plans" it is likely to be done at a higher level and imposed) they are charging per use, by volume or weight or whatever, I don't see how such a monopoly is sustainable. Presumably anyone offering a similar service, perhaps with different innovations, different service levels and so on would have to be free to operate. At that point organizations will be able to usurp that monopolistic provider anyway. Personally I think it would be better to hasten that day, let the DSO become a worker controlled and owned organization (look at ECT!) and let it innovate free of political interference. Coercion could then be limited, say, to ensuring, perhaps through environmental health, that everyone is making arrangements and not being anti-social. > So if the new policy makes people who currently don't recycle, > recycle more, then it's a good thing. Isn't it? But is it the right way to do it? As I said, I have a PET bottle crusher, whose supplier provides bags and pays you for the crushed bottles you return to them. Doesn't that sound like a better way to *encourage* not *make* people who currently don't recycle, recycle more. Incentive, or punishment? Similarly what's happening about the "reduce" and "reuse" bit? I'll bet if the system was opened up to competition and the supermarket companies did begin offering a service that when they deliver your future rubbish to your door they take last week's away, they would soon find there was more incentive not to deliver as much future rubbish in the first place and get more active in reducing packaging. > If you don't like it, dispose of your waste yourself. If you want > to use the council services, then use them. It's not much of a big > deal. Not for any of us. It becomes a big deal if the fine amounts to a third of one's annual city council tax each time > But, please, don't think of them as your servants. You aren't that > important. The system exists (not the individuals) solely to serve purposes that are, theoretically, "democratically" decided (though with the caveat that that tends to mean a minority of a minority actually agree nowadays). The system only exists with the consent of the governed. If it loses that consent it will either disappear or, as seems more likely given the overall direction of travel at the moment, become our authoritarian masters. > Going on holiday now. Enjoy - just remember not to leave the bin out though! > Kate > ex-city works policy officer. > Now, not working for the council. Congratulations (assuming it was by your own choice rather than involuntary!)
Jock -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me
On the question of rubbish left at the end of tenancies (students or other tenants) I do think that landlords have some responsiblity when the tenancies change over. I was at the playground on Valentia Road yesterday while some tenants were moving into one of the houses that face the park. We would see the excitement of the two different families as they moved their children in - and could see them having to make their way past the hedge that had grown to at least 20 feet. You can blame the previous tenants for having let it grow - but why hadn't the landlord had it trimmed back to an acceptable height? Similarly, if landlords pulled all the front yards/gardens of these houses back to a decent standard, then maybe the tenants would invest a little time keeping them neat. With interest rates so low, wouldn't this be a good time for landlords to invest a bit of their rental income into keeping the appearances of their properties up?
Oh come on Kate! You're placing too much emotional significance on the word 'servants'. Check your dictionary: "Servant: n. someone who is hired to perform service .... ; a person who is in the service of the state, the public, a company or other body; someone who serves in any capacity" That's what Jock means, or at least that's what I took him to mean. So no need for a chip on your shoulder about the terminology. By that definition, the people WE pay to perform civic services for US are our servants. They should not be dictators, who create apparently arbitrary rules because they can (e.g. the rule that wheelie bins have to be 'kerbside' - why? The old bins never were and no one complained, and I reiterate, now that the bins have wheels, it's easier to get them a short distance to the lorry than ever before). Having bins in your front garden is unsightly and, I repeat, disgusting. There are plenty of houses in Oxford that have little or no front garden. If you have no access by the dustbin collectors to the back of your house, that's one thing. But if there is access and no problem getting the bins to the lorries as in time-honoured practice, why make you have the bins in front? And re Stephanie's comment on the leaving of bags by the side/on top of - why not collect them? We're paying for the service! Presumably it's to discourage overproduction of detritus, but it still leaves the problem of rats and stray dogs ripping the rejected bags apart, causing further environmental problems. Oh, and I STILL have no bin, so what am I to do? Sneak under cover of darkness and place my two carrier bagsworth of landfill into someone else's? Regarding the comment "If you read your leaflet, you'll see that it talks about "persistent" offenders. This means if you go on holiday, or have a birthday, or some other one-0ff event that means you have an over-stuffed bin, you probably won't be fined." Oh really? I doubt that. Rules is rules innit? Or are you expecting the refuse collectors to keep a chart of some sort marking each householder's customary bin behaviour? Regarding your 7-year-old, everyone knows that children are idealistic and enthusiastic. By the time they become students hormones have kicked in, and in any case it's very different running your own household for the first time, and being a child in a well-organised one. It may well be that the zeitgeist by the time the next generation has reached young adulthood encompasses recycling as a normal activity, but I bet that students will still have their period of indolence.
PG
Stephanie wrote: > I am worried about the categorical statement: "From 3 August 2009, Oxford > City Council will no longer collect excess rubbish placed by the side or > on top of your green wheelie bin" (see scan of front of leaflet, uploaded > herewith). I'm not sure how far this idea has spread in the capital and elsewhere, but in Plaistow, E.London a bunch of previously unemployed lads hit on the idea of following the regular binmen around... and for £2 per household they - Pick up the excess rubbish then power-wash (they tow a water thingy behind their transit) and disinfect the wheelie bins. Then they post a 'You Have Been Binned' flyer through the letterboxes of those who said yes, and collect the £2 charge later....a bit like window-cleaners.
Sorry, it isn't quite pavement-less, there is a pavement about a metre wide and my front door gives directly onto this. My wheelie-bin has been on this pavement for the last two years, as has my neighbour's, and the Council have never picked either of us up on it. AS Kate says, there is no question of the Council picking on people who are doing their bit, just on people who are being persistently inconsiderate. MY wheelie-bin is far more hygeinic than the stinking bin bags I used to have to carry through the house, and I was jolly glad to get it. Regards Noam Bleicher 078 1847 1655 056 0268 4870
> Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:34:57 +0100 > Subject: Re: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish > From: <email obscured> > To: <email obscured> > > > Well said Kate; the Landfill Tax is not a joke. We can't go on landfilling with gay abandon, or we will run out of space in which to do so. A trip up the M40 to Ardley will confirm this. > > No. We are in *no way* running out of space in which to landfill; yes, > we would need to commission new sites; yes there's good reasons to > find alternatives (lechate, for one), but the "running out of space" > argument is simply dishonest. > > Also, consider - economics tells you this to be so. If supply of > landfill space was at such a premium, there wouldn't be any need to > have a "landfill tax", because the precious space would be priced > accordingly, and thus provide the economic incentive to find some > other solution. > > > > > I personally prefer a wheelie-bin outside my [terraced, pavement-less] house then to have to stack up disgusting bin-bags in my back yard for a week and then carry them dripping through my house. > > > > By pavement-less do you mean your front door opens directly onto the > road? If so aren't you a bit stuffed, given leaving your bin there > outside of the "designated hours" will be punished by the Bin Polizei > ? > > Nigel Magnay > > Info about nom Magnay: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/nigelmagnay > > View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6f3DO3rNjgGwcKVSmYDSMS > ----------------------------------------- > To post, e-mail: <email obscured> > Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" > in subject, then send to: <email obscured> > > More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules > ----------------------------------------- > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Messenger: Happy 10-Year Anniversaryget free winks and emoticons. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/157562755/direct/01/
From:
David "inconsistent moderation on these fora is an ongoing problem, and others are tampering with my profile via E-Democ" Hearn
Date:
2009 Jul 28 13:21 UTC
The somewhat naive faith that some still contrive to cherish in our Local Authorities charms us a little, but should give cause for alarm. Verified, sourced media releases and case histories *ABOUND* of councils abusing the taxpayer and voter. (Might I suggest for Noam the novelty of Google?) I have ample direct personal experiences of truly horrific abuses of local power. It's a disgrace. Some officers get away with apparent abuses which elected members can or will seemingly do little to stop or challenge adequately, in many voters' and taxpayers' views. Councils have waxed insalubriously fat; are overstaffed and overpaid; treat "customers" who are captive and unable to use our swingeing taxes to buy our services from cheaper, competent, better providers - with nose-pinching contempt, hauteur and condescension; and, worst, are too often still insufficiently accountable to the very people who feed them and get patronized for the favour! As for bins, as with our insultingly downtrodden UK OAPs, abroad is often better; at least within the EU. In Spain, for instance, bins are sometimes emptied daily - and put BACK! Passports take around 2 days to get from the local cop shop - and cost £8! OAPs are treated with dignity by "yoof" and "society" and the state alike - and get a living pension! Our pensioners are now - officially - poorer than those of Poland and Roumania. Labour denies this. Will "Labsters" massage "customer satisfaction" stats for the bins we used to pay half as much to have collected from wherever we actually kept them, and had properly emptied - weekly!? PUFGL - Pay Up Front, Get Less. Things can only get better. Less is more. NOT political, but factual.
Excellent notes by Jock Coats and Pippa Gwilliam yesterday - to which I can add little - except to add I do not appreciate my local council having the ability to impose random fines without evidence. Offenders are defined as those who have located in front of their house extra waste next to, or on top of the wheelie bin etc - when an official comes to inspect. Now unless the householder keeps a constant watch on said bin or area nearby (difficult during the night or when they are at work) then there's nothing stopping anyone else putting their rubbish there. In other words a fine can be imposed on an innocent householder - and it would be up to him to prove he wasn't guilty - a reversal of the laws of this country. Thinking about it is there an appeal process - or have we got the judge, jury and executioner in one kangaroo court?
"We're paying for the service" - that's true, but only in a collective sense. Our (small) wheelie bin is generally only a quarter to a third full come collection day, which means I'm in effect subsidising the service to those who fill theirs to the brim and more. I'm happy to do that to some extent, but I'm also keen that the council should take some steps to limit the excess. (I do seem to have missed out on the leaflet, though.) To pay for your service individually, some sort of pay-as-you-throw scheme would be needed. I don't think this would be worth the effort. Bins would have to be secured, the collectors would have to change their practices (I often see them very sensibly combining the contents of two or more bins into one to reduce the number of journeys between kerbside and lorry), and a billing mechanism would have to be in place. It all sounds annoying and expensive to me. DH, it sounds like things are pretty bad in your neighbourhood (where is that, by the way?). Where I live, I now get four collections every two weeks (landfill, garden, plastics/cardboard, glass/paper). I used to get just one weekly. I reckon that's a doubling of the service. The relevance of corrupt local officials and Polish pensioners to rubbish collection in Headington has passed me by though. Personally, I haven't found fortnightly collections to be a problem, even when our bin used to have disposable nappies in it. For occasional special circumstances (such as student end-of-term), I would hope the council would be lenient. If not, the suggestion of following the bin lorry around and charging to collect the excess is an enterprising idea (as long as you have somewhere suitable to take it). Alternatively, according to http://www.oxford.gov.uk/environment/bulky-waste.cfm, you could just phone the council and ask them to collect the extra for free. Andy N Quarry
THere are doubtless hundreds of case of abuse as Steven points out, but they must be swamped by the millions of us who have very little dealing with councils at all, or who have positive experiences. Steven should realise that the while media have a duty to raise cases of abuse, they have no obligation to provide context, ie the background of trouble-free business as usual which most of us experience; this does not sell newspapers! In any job there will always be a minority of 'little Hitlers' but for every one of these there will be a Kate Stratford - the polar opposite of a little Hitler - and doubtless hundreds for whom it's just a job. Council employees are human beings, and I'm sure most leave their desk at 1730 and forget about work, and are not in the business of pursuing personal vendettas against ratepayers. Five years ago I had to spend an hour every Sunday afternoon taking recycling to the dump on the bus. I also had to drag stinking bin bags through the house the night before bin day. In stark contrast, I now get all my recycling collected from my door and a hygeinic wheelie-bin out the front of my house, with a heavy lid that keeps the bin bags out of sight and out of mind. I can categorically state that I AM BETTER OFF under the new waste regime and I'm sure I'm not the only one. THis may not suit conspiracy theorists but like I say I doubt there is a conspiracy! Regards Noam Bleicher 078 1847 1655 056 0268 4870
> From: <email obscured> > Subject: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish > To: <email obscured> > Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:24:01 +1200 > > The somewhat naive faith that some still contrive to cherish in our Local Authorities charms us a little, but should give cause for alarm. Verified, sourced media releases and case histories *ABOUND* of councils abusing the taxpayer and voter. (Might I suggest for Noam the novelty of Google?) > > I have ample direct personal experiences of truly horrific abuses of local power. It's a disgrace. Some officers get away with apparent abuses which elected members can or will seemingly do little to stop or challenge adequately, in many voters' and taxpayers' views. > > Councils have waxed insalubriously fat; are overstaffed and overpaid; treat "customers" who are captive and unable to use our swingeing taxes to buy our services from cheaper, competent, better providers - with nose-pinching contempt, hauteur and condescension; and, worst, are too often still insufficiently accountable to the very people who feed them and get patronized for the favour! > > As for bins, as with our insultingly downtrodden UK OAPs, abroad is often better; at least within the EU. In Spain, for instance, bins are sometimes emptied daily - and put BACK! Passports take around 2 days to get from the local cop shop - and cost 8! OAPs are treated with dignity by "yoof" and "society" and the state alike - and get a living pension! > > Our pensioners are now - officially - poorer than those of Poland and Roumania. Labour denies this. Will "Labsters" massage "customer satisfaction" stats for the bins we used to pay half as much to have collected from wherever we actually kept them, and had properly emptied - weekly!? > > PUFGL - Pay Up Front, Get Less. Things can only get better. Less is more. NOT political, but factual. > > > D Hearn > http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/ow_gui.html, http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/ow_gui.html > Info about DH: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/3k1vCIsl1GsCLaGyiUNmBb > > View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5JiU0A5PWYtsqb1LxSyLCi > ----------------------------------------- > To post, e-mail: <email obscured> > Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" > in subject, then send to: <email obscured> > > More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules > ----------------------------------------- > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net _________________________________________________________________ Share your memories online with anyone you want. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/
The city council collection service is for large items only (fridges,
armchairs etc.), and it can be up to two weeks before items are
collected. I doubt very much whether they would come specially to
remove waste bags -- and it would be very counter-productive if they
did.
The leaflet offers just two stark solutions for people whose waste
hasn't been collected: they should either (1) put the surplus bags
straight into their newly-emptied wheelie bin (which will ensure a
double-sized problem a fortnight later, etc etc) or (2) take them to
Redbridge (which they won't be able to do if they don't have a car,
and will probably be loath to do even if they do have transport).
The doorstep recycling service is great for those who live a long way
from a recycling centre. But you still have to go to a recycling
centre to get rid of things like plastic containers and Tetrapaks, and
that is a great shame.
The leaflet with this information was tucked inside ("Your Oxford"):
maybe the people who haven't seen it put the city newspaper straight
into their recycling bins?
A bouquet for a change. At the top end of Kennett Road, for what seems like years, the tenants of the flats had been dumping rubbish bags - lilac, clear and all sorts, at the foot of the staircase spilling out onto the pavement pretty much daily. I and others consistently reported this as a nuisance via the council website. It was acting as a magnet for other dumping including beds and other furniture. In the last month, the situation is transformed and there are no more bags and waste left in this location. The Council has provided a large skip in a sensible place behind the flats and the tenants are now using that. I don't know what happened to make the tenants change their habits - it may have been a steep fine or a series of them, it may have been humane negotiation. But that's the sort of nuisance that needs to be handled properly and efficiently, and although it has taken a very long time to resolve, it clearly has been. We had another issue with commercial waste in orange bags being left by the bus stop outside the charity shops - the bags were being ripped open by people looking for clothes and bargains and the contents strewn about. This too was stopped (after a long time) through negotiation - I don't know if there were fines. But this is the Council (eventually) getting it right. The message for us in this strand of discussion is that it took months if not years to be resolved - there was no evidence of them taking rapid action in these flagrant and offensive cases - so I'm hoping that the practice of enforcement at individual bin level will be handled intelligently and sensitively rather than in an immediate, threatening and arbitrary way. Certainly the arbitrary and foolish cases get written up (very many times in some cases) in dramatic accounts which end up being found on Google - but will this one be too to balance the argument? We can but hope - but it is at least the other side of the coin. Is anyone from the Council lurking on this discussion who can comment? I think they should - Government Offices are being encouraged at national level to 'Twitter' and engage electronically and this is a simple and excellent way for them to do it. David Clover Kennett Road
-----Original Message----- From: Noam Bleicher <email obscured>] Sent: 29 July 2009 09:29 To: <email obscured>; <email obscured> Subject: Re: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish THere are doubtless hundreds of case of abuse as Steven points out, but they must be swamped by the millions of us who have very little dealing with councils at all, or who have positive experiences. Steven should realise that the while media have a duty to raise cases of abuse, they have no obligation to provide context, ie the background of trouble-free business as usual which most of us experience; this does not sell newspapers! In any job there will always be a minority of 'little Hitlers' but for every one of these there will be a Kate Stratford - the polar opposite of a little Hitler - and doubtless hundreds for whom it's just a job. Council employees are human beings, and I'm sure most leave their desk at 1730 and forget about work, and are not in the business of pursuing personal vendettas against ratepayers. Five years ago I had to spend an hour every Sunday afternoon taking recycling to the dump on the bus. I also had to drag stinking bin bags through the house the night before bin day. In stark contrast, I now get all my recycling collected from my door and a hygeinic wheelie-bin out the front of my house, with a heavy lid that keeps the bin bags out of sight and out of mind. I can categorically state that I AM BETTER OFF under the new waste regime and I'm sure I'm not the only one. THis may not suit conspiracy theorists but like I say I doubt there is a conspiracy! Regards Noam Bleicher 078 1847 1655 056 0268 4870 > From: <email obscured> > Subject: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish > To: <email obscured> > Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:24:01 +1200 > > The somewhat naive faith that some still contrive to cherish in our Local Authorities charms us a little, but should give cause for alarm. Verified, sourced media releases and case histories *ABOUND* of councils abusing the taxpayer and voter. (Might I suggest for Noam the novelty of Google?) > > I have ample direct personal experiences of truly horrific abuses of local power. It's a disgrace. Some officers get away with apparent abuses which elected members can or will seemingly do little to stop or challenge adequately, in many voters' and taxpayers' views. > > Councils have waxed insalubriously fat; are overstaffed and overpaid; treat "customers" who are captive and unable to use our swingeing taxes to buy our services from cheaper, competent, better providers - with nose-pinching contempt, hauteur and condescension; and, worst, are too often still insufficiently accountable to the very people who feed them and get patronized for the favour! > > As for bins, as with our insultingly downtrodden UK OAPs, abroad is often better; at least within the EU. In Spain, for instance, bins are sometimes emptied daily - and put BACK! Passports take around 2 days to get from the local cop shop - and cost 8! OAPs are treated with dignity by "yoof" and "society" and the state alike - and get a living pension! > > Our pensioners are now - officially - poorer than those of Poland and Roumania. Labour denies this. Will "Labsters" massage "customer satisfaction" stats for the bins we used to pay half as much to have collected from wherever we actually kept them, and had properly emptied - weekly!? > > PUFGL - Pay Up Front, Get Less. Things can only get better. Less is more. NOT political, but factual. > > > D Hearn > http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/ow_gui.html, http://ombudsmanwatchers.org.uk/ow_gui.html > Info about DH: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/3k1vCIsl1GsCLaGyiUNmBb > > View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5JiU0A5PWYtsqb1LxSyLCi > ----------------------------------------- > To post, e-mail: <email obscured> > Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" > in subject, then send to: <email obscured> > > More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules > ----------------------------------------- > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net _________________________________________________________________ Share your memories online with anyone you want. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/ Noam Bleicher New Hinksey, Oxford Info about Noam Bleicher: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/3r1u0OpAwUymfsnvetfRmk View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2HJjHIZNXeR2tZa706tE6o ----------------------------------------- To post, e-mail: <email obscured> Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" in subject, then send to: <email obscured> More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules ----------------------------------------- Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
On 29 Jul 2009, at 10:04, David Clover wrote: > We can but hope - but it is at least the other side of the coin. Is > anyone from the Council lurking on this discussion who can comment? > I think they should - Government Offices are being encouraged at > national level to 'Twitter' and engage electronically and this is a > simple and excellent way for them to do it. To wilt your bouquet a little David, I notice that, despite previous requests and an ongoing national campaign asking councils to make their news and so on from their websites available on RSS so that community groups and similar can syndicate it, Oxford still doesn't have such a simple facility. So if there is anyone listening who can comment or get something done - can they nag the right people too about that. If the software they use for the website does offer it, it ought to be a simple matter of turning it on, if it doesn't then it's not really fit web software nowadays!
Jock -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me
Hi Jock, although it won't be relevant to the rubbish bag discussion (which is a city council concern), Oxfordshire County Council does have RSS feeds for all its news categories (we categorise our news by subject and place). We also have a feature that makes it easy for local webmasters etc to embed our news on their site - see the bottom of this page: http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/rss So, no knowledge of how to manipulate RSS feeds required!
I have had a good look - and it seems that there's no RSS news feed available from Oxford City Council's website at all on any topic. I use an excellent RSS aggregator called 'Feed Demon' which I thoroughly recommend. It works on my desk PC and also in my PDA - and it would work on mobile phones too. I've added the 'Oxford' feed to mine from OCC. You can find out about this free service by looking for 'Newsgator' in a Google search where it all links up. You need to set up an account, but once that's done everything talks and updates very nicely whatever system you are coming from - Mac, PC etc. David Clover Kennett Road
-----Original Message----- From: <email obscured> <email obscured>] Sent: 29 July 2009 10:46 To: <email obscured> Subject: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish Hi Jock, although it won't be relevant to the rubbish bag discussion (which is a city council concern), Oxfordshire County Council does have RSS feeds for all its news categories (we categorise our news by subject and place). We also have a feature that makes it easy for local webmasters etc to embed our news on their site - see the bottom of this page: http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk/rss So, no knowledge of how to manipulate RSS feeds required! Robin Potter Info about Robin Potter: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/robinpotter View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6cyOFYr9Ns6o1HaGIHThTy ----------------------------------------- To post, e-mail: <email obscured> Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" in subject, then send to: <email obscured> More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules ----------------------------------------- Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
I live in a terraced house and am supplied with purple sacks for landfill rubbish. I wish I had blue sacks from the City Council. I was never offered them. It would be much easier to carry recyclable things through the house in bags rather than boxes. Marie Vickers
--- On Sun, 26/7/09, Jock Coats <email obscured>> wrote: From: Jock Coats <email obscured>> Subject: Re: [Oxford-HM] Bags of rubbish To: "Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum" <email obscured>> Date: Sunday, 26 July, 2009, 10:18 PM On 26 Jul 2009, at 21:18, <email obscured> wrote: > This thread does seem to have become rather political. Though despite protestations to the contrary, not "party" political. My post was more a "plague on all your houses" (and explicitly said so at one point - how else is one supposed to read "Merely voting for another party using the same system is not really any better. By themselves participating in that system each party is complicit in it"?). Nonetheless on your substantive point... > What happens if students move into a house which has no recycling > boxes? And how are they supposed to know what goes in which box? > (It is not obvious: I would expect a large green wheelie bin with > "Recycle for Oxford" plastered on the side to be a recycling bin, > for instance.) Perhaps the city needs to get in touch with landlords and agents - especially any who are registered under the multi-occupancy registration scheme - and put the onus on them to ensure that when a tenancy commences they have the complete set. As regards Brookes students, the majority of them will have spent their first year in halls of residence. The recycling regime in place in halls of residence (which I think is also replicated in Oxford University hall type accommodation) is designed to introduce them to the city's normal system for when they are living out. We do not have blue boxes, but do have blue bags. The main difference is that they can only put glass into the green boxes (because they are not sorted at the kerbside but deposited centrally in large glass bins that the council empties once a week) and plastic *and* paper into the blue bags. I think it will be more difficult if and when food waste is collected separately across the city - there is a limit to the number of receptacles we can reasonably get into the students' kitchens - but they will at least have been introduced to the basics of the system and should not really have an excuse for not at least replicating what they have had a year to get used to. Indeed, the Brookes system is somewhat more onerous than the general city-wide system - our students have to take their blue bags to a central comingled recycling compound and their green boxes to a collection point for each block. Only their residual waste is collected by hall staff from their flats. > If the city council refuses to collect rubbish placed beside the > bins, how are students who do not have cars supposed to deal with it > as it starts to build up and fester? I agree, though it is worth also saying that nearly a third of households on average across the country do not have access to a car; and they are predominantly the less well off and the elderly. Whilst it might be assumed that these groups are less likely also to overflow their bins, if they do they are the ones who are going to be disproportionately affected by a draconian punishment regime. Certainly if there really is no plan to weigh and charge, then a rethink on this fines policy is required - at least allowing discretion (and ensuring a personal visit and chat before punishment) and not simply slapping some penalty charge notice that could be more than a week's earnings for some and cause real distress. Jock -- Jock Coats - OX3 Online, the community portal for OX3 Warden's Flat 1e, J Block Morrell Hall, OXFORD, OX3 0FF m: 07769 695767 skype:jock.coats?call <email obscured> http://jockcoats.me Jock Coats Headington/Marston - Headington Hill, Oxford Info about Jock Coats: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/jockcoats View all messages on this topic at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4GnaU9mk7HXUQAXos1iZe8 ----------------------------------------- To post, e-mail: <email obscured> Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly. To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on" in subject, then send to: <email obscured> More information about Oxford - Headington & Marston Neighbourhood Forum: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/oxford-hm E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules ----------------------------------------- Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
Like Noam, I've not had too much of a problem - admittedly there's been the boxes not being emptied, and instances of them being scattered merrily around my garden, but that seems to have stopped now. And to be fair to the binmen, I live on a terrace that's set back from the road about 10-15 metres, and we all just put our bins at our gates and they pick them up and return them there, which is helpful. It still annoys me though that I have to take Tetra Paks and general plastics to Redbridge though - I really don't see why they can't go in the green box with the rest of the manually-sorted stuff. "The leaflet offers just two stark solutions for people whose waste hasn't been collected: they should either (1) put the surplus bags straight into their newly-emptied wheelie bin (which will ensure a double-sized problem a fortnight later, etc etc) or (2) take them to Redbridge (which they won't be able to do if they don't have a car, and will probably be loath to do even if they do have transport)." I can't exactly see OBC or Stagecoach being too happy with people turning up for the bus with dribbly binbags...
Loading…
Design Party? Join our Projects volunteer online group to help design a new image for your local forum's home page.
Home - Mobile - Forums - Wiki - Blog - About - Help - Contact - People - Donate - Rules - Archives
Need help? Get support.
Creative Commons - Share our content with attribution
Hosted by E-Democracy.org. Sponsored by OnlineGroups.Net - easier email collaboration for your organization. Powered by GroupServer - open source web-based mailing list manager.