Recycling needs a big boost to save big bucks

The Council has issued a press release urging residents to help cut council tax by cutting the amount of rubbish they put out and increasing recycling.

At first, I thought the Council had thrown its support behind the radical idea I've been supporting for some time - that of allowing councils to cut the council tax of those who recycle more. This is something that would act as a personal incentive for all of us to boost recycling and save money at the same time.

Just 26% of Wandsworth's rubbish is currently recycled: that remains a low figure given recycling has been a mainstream environmental policy for twenty years or so. I think our recycling rate should be double that - and it's achievable, even in an inner London borough like ours.

But for that we need stronger local leadership. Recycling on council estates remains minimal: a few bins are provided but they're insufficient and not emptied regularly enough. Recycling on estates has become associated with mess and inconvenience, rather than a social good. Only this week I've been in correspondence with the council about this: they sited a bin right next to a resident's living room window. He can't open his window because of the smell created and flies attracted by the recycling as the bin gets full a few days before it is due for collection. This isn't an incentive to recycle: it's a barrier to it.

Doubling Wandsworth's recycling rate won't be easy but we need to make the effort. On council estates, the council has to look at something that has a terrible name but is the only way to really get recycling going: "vertical kerbside" - which means door to door recycling collections. Or, in blocks where there are two distinct rubbish chutes, it should look at the viability of designating one for recycling and one for non-recyclable rubbish.

But as well as making the practicalities of recycling easier, we also need to give residents an incentive to recycle beyond the warm fuzzy feeling we get from doing something "good". I believe that the financial gain realised by a council from the savings made from a reduction in the amount of rubbish sent to landfill, should be shared only with those of us who actively recycle, rather than everyone. As recycling becomes easier and easier, why should those who have never recycled benefit in equal measure to those who do? How we bring that about needs a lot more thought and debate because the issue of councils monitoring each household's rubbish has, understandably, been very controversial.

In part, the hostility aroused was because councils didn't consult on their plans, didn't explain properly what they were doing and why, and - most importantly - didn't want to reduce the bills of those who did recycle: they just wanted to add even more tax to those who didn't. Well, as I've argued before, that's a disastrous mistake: green taxes must not be EXTRA taxes. And besides, incentives to do something usually work far better than punishments for not doing it.

Green taxes: wrong conclusions being drawn

One of the conclusions some people are leaping to after setbacks for councils that have tried to introduce so-called bin taxes; from Boris Johnson's plans to repeal the higher congestion charge fee for larger cars; and from the current furore over increased road tax for the more polluting vehicles is that green taxes equal electoral suicide.

On the face of it who could possibly argue with the evidence of the unpopularity of these taxes, vented through the ballot box?

But in reality, it's not green taxes that are the problem: it's extra taxes, and the abuse of environmental charges to pursue other political ends that voters - quite understandably - are reacting against.

Take each of those issues I mentioned above. I support the principle of the polluter paying more. But the congestion charge is what it says on the label: a charge to reduce congestion, not to reduce pollution. If a political party want to suggest a new tax to reduce polluting vehicles on our streets then fine: let's have an open, honest, upfront debate involving the public. But don't cynically attempt to bolt on a "pollution" justification to hike up a tax that has nothing to do with its objective.

The same is true with controlled parking: charges to park on a particular street exist because there is not enough roadspace to park the number of vehicles - residential or commuter - that wish to occupy it. They are not an excuse for Lib Dem councils like Richmond to fleece their own residents above and beyond their already exhorbitant council tax.

And when we're talking about charging people who don't recycle, why aren't we also talking about both rewarding those who do with tax rebates - AND scrapping that proportion of council tax devoted to refuse services as well? Councils can't have it both ways: either charge through council tax, or charge households individually - you can't do both and expect to get re-elected.

People are not against green tax: they are just against politicians trying to squeeze even more money out of them on the pretense that its for the environment. Politicians need to wake up that the public aren't stupid: they can see what are stealth taxes and what are serious, honest attempts to address a particular problem. That's why the congestion charge itself was and remains broadly popular, and why the gas-guzzler surcharge (and the zone extension) was not.

I've argued in earlier posts that incentives are far more effective in dealing with climate change than taxes. I've also made clear my concern that the stampede towards the environmental agenda which we've seen in the past five years would actually do more harm than good to the cause - and we've seen that in the exploitation of green tax for more tax.

Green taxes are good - and honestly applied, they're not unpopular either. We need to start being straight with the public - transparent in their levying, ringfenced in their use, encompassing rewards and incentives as well as taxes and charges, and neutral in the overall level of tax levied as a result. That way politicians will avoid reaping the whirlwind of electoral defeat as they did last week.

My August parliamentary report

It?s difficult to find a more imaginative way to kick-off these reports than: ?it?s been a really busy few weeks? ? and it really is true for me, at least on the personal front.

I got married at the end of July and been on honeymoon for the past fortnight so I hope you?ll forgive me this short distraction from my duties as your parliamentary candidate.

But as you?d expect from a politician I?ve still got plenty to say, so let?s get back to business!

I mentioned last month that I?m making housing my number one priority, and the Government has now published its consultation paper. While it?s a promising start, some of the ideas don?t really apply to the crisis in London which is on a bigger scale and where land is scarcer.

We need a twin-track approach in London: a large increase in affordable rented homes built for those who will never have the sort of income to benefit from the property market; and far more practical help for those who are struggling to get a foot on the ladder ? which means a higher stamp duty threshold in London, more homebuy schemes, and more imaginative shared-ownership solutions

Some will argue that this is why we need to sell off even more council homes, as ex-council stock tends to be most affordable private housing around. But the stock of affordable rented homes locally has become so small that it causes real problems for the remaining council tenants and their families. I support right-to-buy but for every council home sold off, I want to see two new homes for rent built. We must put an end to the stigma the Conservatives created that there?s something wrong with being a council or housing association tenant: there is not.

I was really surprised to discover that in the two years Justine Greening has been MP not once has she asked a parliamentary question on the issue of affordable homes or providing help for first time buyers in Putney. Politicians rightly have differing outlooks and priorities: but as your MP, housing will be at the top of my list of priorities and my words and deeds as your MP will demonstrate this.

Although the scale was nowhere near as damaging as the rest of the country, our borough wasn?t spared from the freak floods that hit towards the end of July. The Wandle burst its banks flooding several homes in Southfields and roads throughout the constituency were for a time transformed into rivers. Whether or not you were directly affected permanently higher insurance premiums may be on the cards if this erratic weather is ultimately linked to climate change.

Climate change is possibly the biggest global threat we face but already I sense a tiring of the incessant attempts to link any freak catastrophe with global warming, or to use it as an excuse to levy new taxes seemingly for the sake of it. I?ve led on the environment locally all my political life ? I became interested in it at school when non-one was talking about it and on the Council it was my portfolio for eight years. I am not a climate change sceptic, but those of us who do care passionately about the issue must be careful not to over-reach because we need to be trusted in order to take the tough decisions necessary.

When confronted with a massive problem like climate change people understandably demand facts and action. The problem is that this isn?t maths: there isn?t one right answer and everything else is wrong. The warnings about climate change are based on forecasts; forecasts are based on assumptions and assumptions are not facts, no matter how much analysis lies behind them.

There is a tendency to dismiss out of hand anyone who dares differ from the climate change orthodoxy. We need to be teaching climate change in our classrooms, but as part of a syllabus that demands that pupils challenge assumptions, test to destruction arguments and not accept that the easiest answer is always the right one. And we adults shouldn?t do that either.

Finally, just a quick plug: if you?re on Facebook, please join my Stuart King for Putney group by clicking here.