5
The Chair invited Councillors Gooch and Green to explain the reasons for the Call-In.
Councillor Gooch referred to the discussions at Cabinet on 7 October 2025 when it had been decided to replace the green lids with brown lids and several Councillors had asked questions about the logic of spending nearly a third of a million pounds to replace just bin lids, although they had acknowledged that was cheaper than buying a completely new bin. Both Councillors Byatt and Jepson had asked if it would be more viable to purchase stickers to cover the existing lids instead of replacing them. Councillor Byatt had obtained a quote of £40K for 50K stickers and, given green waste stickers were currently used, this seemed a much cheaper option, however, it had been dismissed by one Cabinet Member as a “Back of a Fag Packet” idea. This had been covered by Anglia News and the Daily Mail and opposition parties felt that sufficient alternatives to bulk bin buying had not been explored and more cost-effective solutions had not been considered, hence the Call-In. She added that, in the face of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), the idea of spending £350K that might only serve for the next few years until the Unitary Authority took over, might not be a good use of resources due to rebranding etc. She stated that she had taken on board the Cabinet Member’s report which stated the cost of stickers would be £400-700K for the lifespan, however, she stressed that her concern was about the next two year interim period. She concluded that everyone knew that stickers already did the job.
Councillor Green explained that he had spoken to about 20 residents and they were all happy with their green bin. He had asked them if they would be confused if they had a black bin with a green lid and they had said no. He added that he had not told any of them the cost to replace the bin lids as he had not wanted to bias them towards stickers. He concluded that the residents were happy with their green bin and the sticker on the front told them that they had paid and they put their waste in.
In response to the Chair’s invitation to ask Councillors Gooch or Green questions, the following responses were received:
- It was not being suggested that the duration of the stickers was only two years as they usually lasted a lot longer than that but the comment had been because of LGR and because the colour of the bins was only being recommended not mandated by Government although WRAP wanted to have all the same.
- Recycling was currently 42% and was projected to increase to 55% but that was still lower than the expected Government targets which meant it was likely there would be a lot of contamination anyway. People tended to look for their sticker, as they were easy to see, to determine which bin it was. Bin contamination was all about education. If stickers were purchased they could be adapted to suit those with disability eg having braille on them but even if new lids were purchased consideration needed to be given to those who were disabled. A national campaign was needed on what was supposed to go in each bin to reduce contamination.
- A colleague had also conducted a straw poll and residents’ views were similar to those that Councillor Green had found.
- The bins were different in the north and south of the district but residents knew which bins they were because of the stickers.
- It was clear from the media and press coverage that a lot of people were up in arms that the Council were spending this amount of money on new bin lids and that stickers would be a better approach.
- It was not known what information was intended to be included on the bin lids but perhaps information stickers could be used as a compromise. Contamination levels and the consequences of it were very important so an educational piece was needed to explain that it was a huge cost to the Council and that if it was addressed there would be more money to spend on services. Information stickers would be good to explain what should go in each bin as the colours did not really matter as they were not mandated so there were all sorts of variants across the country.
- It was not proposed that the stickers would only last for two years but in the face of LGR and new branding, this Council should think before committing to purchasing East Suffolk Council branded items or introducing unique systems.
- Post LGR, it was hoped that the bins would be continued, however, they were currently different in the north and the south of the district so there was a need to look at Council funding and shared assets in terms of LGR, therefore this Council needed to be prudent and try to future proof things if possible.
Councillor Jepson pointed out that some of the questions to Councillors Gooch and Green should be directed to the Cabinet Member. He clarified that one of the reasons he had been unhappy with the original Cabinet report was that it had led him to believe that the cost to replace the bin lids would come out of Council Taxpayers’ money but he had noticed that the current report stated all the funding would come from Government.
The Chair pointed out that it was still public money even if it came from Government. He then invited the Cabinet Member to introduce the Response to the Call-in and to respond to some of the earlier questions.
The Cabinet Member explained the colours and use of the bins currently in circulation and those proposed under Better Recycling, including the introduction of a small silver grey body/lid bin for food waste and a black body/green lid bin for fibre recycling. He clarified that the existing blue body/lid bins would be repurposed for plastic/Tetra Paks etc. He pointed out that this meant there would be a mixture of bin body colours being used, therefore, it was important to have absolute consistency on the lids and all the comms and education pieces would refer to the lid colours. As part of Better Recycling, the intention was to keep a stock of grey bodied bins with a selection of different bin lid colours which would be available for those people who needed to replace their bins or to supply new houses. This meant that bin bodies would not always have to be replaced.
In response to Members’ queries, the Cabinet Member stated that:
- The Council was working in partnership with other Suffolk districts who collected waste and the County Council was responsible for the disposal of waste and recycling. Elsewhere in the country, all recyclables were collected together and an automated sorting system was used but it cost approximately £60M so that was not an option for Suffolk at the moment. It was intended, therefore, that everything would be as standardised as possible across Suffolk and, whilst it was acknowledged, the colours were not mandated, there was an emerging standard that garden waste would be brown and fibre had a green lid.
- LGR was coming and East Suffolk would either be in the 1 Suffolk model where everything should be standardised or in a unitary split across other districts but either way the problem would still exist so it did not help to delay the decision until the outcome of LGR was known. The rest of Suffolk used brown bins but the previous Administration had decided not to, so something had to be done about it.
- Bin collectors knew which households had garden waste subscriptions due to the stickers but the intention was to get rid of these stickers so it was not possible to compare like for like and the full cost of stickers would needed to be included.
- It was good news that glass and Tetra Paks would be collected kerbside but needed to be separated out, however, this was a complicated message to deliver. Similarly, it would need to be made clear what would go in the small silver food waste bin and what would go in the garden waste bin.
- It was not possible to canvass all East Suffolk’s residents to ask if they understood what bin was used for what so the Comms team needed to communicate the messages and what appeared to be a really simple idea might not land that easily with the public as messages were taken on board very differently throughout the population.
- Paper and cardboard was the most valuable recyclate but a contaminated lorry cost the Council over £1K and one lorry could be contaminated by just a small amount of garden waste that someone put in the wrong bin. Staff did check bins as they went into the lorry but they could easily miss something so there was a need to do as much comms as possible to avoid contamination.
- Bin lids all had ridges and were not entirely flat so getting a sticker to adhere to them would be challenging eg rain could get underneath a sticker on the top more readily than stickers on the side of a bin. Everything would depend on residents sticking them on the bins in the correct place as some might stick them on the side or the top, others might get the sticker folded on to itself, so the Council might get asked for replacement stickers which came at an additional cost, therefore, it was not as simple as it sounded.
- It was not possible to get a sticker to cover the whole lid which meant part of the lid would still be green and would be next to another black body bin with a green lid containing paper which would make it easy to mistake and increase the risk of contamination. Also, some residents might forget to put the sticker on. Residents would also need to be educated about how to put the stickers on correctly so this would increase the comms needed. The risk of stickers was that they would cost more and could increase contamination rates.
- Consideration had been given to washing and repurposing green bins but this had been deemed too complex.
- Stickers would need to be professionally applied but by the time this was done, the Council might as well just change the lids.
- The issue was not whether residents were happy with their green waste bin but if they could actively tell the difference between their bins. They were already standardised across the rest of Suffolk.
- Assistance with bin collections was already available for blind people or others who had injuries etc.
- Whilst it was still taxpayers money the Council also needed to be a bit parochial given the challenges of the Government settlement. The Government were not likely to give any more in say 15 years for new stickers so it was more cost effective to do now.
The Chair invited Members’ Questions to Councillor Ashton and Officers and the following responses were received:
- The Government funding was only able to be used to implement Simpler/Better Recycling.
- The original Cabinet report might not have been clear, however, the team had always said that Government funding was available to buy new bins for Better Recycling.£3M had been budgeted but the costs had been less than anticipated.
- Whilst the point was acknowledged that most people associated garden waste with green, and paper and cardboard with brown, it was pointed out that the standard bin colours across Suffolk were different to that eg the Council had been supplying brown bins for garden waste for some time now. Or the other option was to ask the rest of Suffolk to change their bin colours but that was unlikely to happen.
- Under the new Simpler Recycling model, the Council would be responsible for contamination and would be paid according to a benchmark with other similar authorities.
- Delivering the first sticker would be quite easy but there would be consequences when a sticker came off and a replacement was needed eg there would be calls to the Council and there was no guarantee that the bin could be accessed easily to replace them whereas new bins would be delivered to the front of the house. The new lids would be replaced on the day the waste was collected and arrangements would be made with the distributor for a process to deliver new lids to those who had not put their bin out on collection day. The fundamental issue was how long a sticker would last as they would weather much more quickly and the risk of contamination.
- The current blue lidded bin would be used for glass and plastics etc. A new black body and green lid bin would be delivered for fibre recycling but that clashed with the green bin - if a blue lidded bin was delivered that would clash with the other one!
- Whilst the initial cost of purchasing lids versus stickers was much more expensive, the whole comms strategy would need to change if stickers were used instead of bin lids so there was a consequence to each proposal.
- The Waste Strategy Manager was very experienced and his recommendation was to change the bin lids.
- The rest of Suffolk were already standardised and if we were different then, once LGR happened, part of our area would have different bins and it would be much harder to get consistent comms messages out.
- The figure quoted for the stickers was based on the cost of the current subscription stickers and on the assumption that they would be replaced every two years. The costs quoted did not include the £1K cost to the Council of contaminated lorries if residents put garden waste in the wrong bin.
- The problem with stickers was that the comms would be much more challenging and would be even more difficult when LGR was implemented. Comms was going to be difficult in any case as most residents would not hear or understand about the recycling changes and would probably learn from the neighbours so the risk of contamination was very high especially in the early days of Better Recycling. The app was a big part of the comms message and it was being explored about how targeted messages could be, ideally it would be possible to make them individual to each user.
- There was not a separate contingency funding pot for contamination but an assessment was carried out of semi-rural/urban areas whereby DEFRA would state the expected recycling performance and the Council would be paid for the medium performance of recycling rates. There was an acceptance of some contamination but it was hugely challenging.
- Stickers would have to go on the lid to change the colour of it rather than the side of the bin because the fibre bin also had a green lid so the risk of contamination was higher but if the lid colour was changed residents would find it more easy to identify which bin was which.
The Chair commented that he struggled to remove the old stickers so he did not think they would just fall off.
The Chair then invited the Committee to debate and make any recommendations.
Councillor Lynch stated that he felt the issue was not the use of stickers but contamination and if that was the real issue then stickers were needed on all the bins so people knew what should be in each one. He added that 40% recycling rates seemed to indicate there was a lot of contamination so the real problem was what information was on the bin to give more chance of reducing contamination rates.
Councillor Jepson reminded the Committee that the decision had been called in had been about the colour of the bin not information on stickers. He added that he felt it had been a good debate but he had the impression that the Cabinet Member would still prefer to go ahead with lids rather than stickers. He concluded that he was slightly more comfortable now that it had been clarified that the money would come from central Government rather than East Suffolk Council’s budget.
Councillor Clery stated that he felt it would be a false economy because although purchasing stickers might save money it was only creating an enduring problem as people could put them on in the wrong place but changing the bin lids to the same as the rest of Suffolk would make the comms more consistent. He stressed that the solution needed to be as simple as possible because of the high cost of contamination. He added that consideration should also be given to making it as easy as possible for the bin collectors to quickly see which was the right bin to put in the lorry.
Councillor Gooch agreed with Councillor Clery’s comment regarding a false economy but also agreed with the comments of Councillors Cawley and Lynch regarding the need for communication on the bins rather than it really being about the colour of the lid. She added that people would be stressing about having more bins and separating paper from plastics etc so the comms was really important. She reiterated the point that the original Cabinet paper had not made it clear that the funding would come from central Government and queried if a bid could be made for a flat rate that would enable the sticker option to be tried.
Councillor Ashton responded that the costs had to be presented to Government as part of the New Burdens Fund and, although it was possible funding might be available for a first sticker, the lifespan of them could not be guaranteed and it was unlikely Government funding would be received for any replacements so the cost would have to be borne by the Council. He agreed that it would be great to have a sticker with lots of information on it but added that there were consequences to doing so. He confirmed that it was Government funding and reiterated his apologies if the original Cabinet report had been unclear
The Chair queried what would happen to the old bin lids and it was noted that they would be recycled into new bins or lids.
Councillor Cawley stressed that whether it was Government or Council funding, it was still taxpayers’ money. He pointed out that bin collectors knew which bin needed to be taken as households put them out. He added that recycling bin lids was still a very expensive process.
Councillor Gooch stated that, having listened to the Cabinet Member and the debate, she was unsure what the best route was to take but now had a much better understanding why Cabinet was not proposing stickers. She added that the issue was that there were problems nationally with recycling and the wrong choices were being made about bin colours.
Councillor Jepson reluctantly suggested that the Cabinet Member be thanked for the information and clarifying points and that this Committee support the original Cabinet decision.
On the proposition of Councillor Jepson, seconded by Councillor Ninnmey it was
RESOLVED
That Cabinet be advised that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee support the decision to procure brown bin lids in accordance with Cabinet Report ES/2535.
The Cabinet Member stated that the call-in process had been truly helpful and, whilst he could not give any commitments, he would reflect on the suggestion of information stickers on bin lids.