Jump to content

Recommended Posts

#There's a small PDF file of Southwark textile banks dated June 2016 http://www.2.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/13595/textiles_clothes_and_shoes_june_2016 that is I guess Renata's source. It covers the whole borough and includes what I take to be a charity associate in each case. Lewisham also list one outside block flats 270/332 Wood Vale, SE23 3DZ.


I found the list on the Southwark website only by doing a word search, and wasn't able to find any other useful reference there to textile banks or to acceptable input and its use.


Some other councils provide accessible lists, and better information. Westminster, for example, say "Please ensure all materials are clean. All items suitable for reuse will be sold at a Scope charity shop in London and any items unsuitable for reuse will be recycled." https://www.westminster.gov.uk/textile-recycling. Haringey say "The clothing will be collected by LMB and hand-sorted to separate the good quality clothing that can be used again from lower quality or damaged items which can then be shredded and made into cloths. More information on how LMB sorts and recycles clothing can be found on the company's website..." http://www.haringey.gov.uk/environment-and-waste/refuse-and-recycling/recycling/street-recycling/textile-recycling


I'm now assuming that Southwark's acceptance policy and practice is similar.

  • 1 month later...

Renata,


So your council awarded this private sector multinational a contract for 25 years to tend to the waste management needs of the borough, and once they reneged on providing a core service under that contract, your idea of holding them accountable was to send a brief enquiry, internal to the council, and then copy and paste their reply here without any scrutiny? Anyone who cares to use a search engine for a couple of minutes can see the obvious way in which Southwark residents have been stitched up here.

A mobile recycling unit for THREE HOURS once every couple of weeks, at a time when most people are working (yes, majority of population don't work evenings !).

Is flytipping next to a recycling centre better than down dark alleys, behind garages and in car parks and playgrounds ? I think so. The flytipping won't stop.

What proportion of waste collected at Sainsburys when the permanent recycling centre existed was flytipped ?

Hi Henry_17,

I don't believe Veolia reneged on any core part of the contract. When Labour came to power in 2010 they negotiated with Veolia to change the service. Effectively food waste recycling came earlier but Veolia were let of from the tough recycling levels set in the original contract.

Recycling rate in Southwark is now well below where it would have had to be if the original contract was adhered to and not negotiated away.

Sadly most people's interest in recycling rates has waned.

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> When Labour came to power in 2010....


The rate of recycling in England was increasing at a decent annual rate from 2000 to 2010 and then flatlined thereafter. The latest available figures (published late 2016) actually showed an annual decline for the first time.


A DEFRA publication summarising their policies from 2010-2015 states:

"Removing centrally imposed recycling targets"

"We?ve removed centrally imposed recycling targets. This will allow councils to act on their own local priorities, while also improving recycling rates."


So the evidence would suggest that the big difference was caused by a policy change at national level.


Southwark still has the best recycling rate in central London btw - double that of Westminster (which is probably a bit more important than the information on their website not being quite as good).

http://i1056.photobucket.com/albums/t370/dcdulwich/61E04C18-2991-4DB4-B408-50DAF3013A3A_zpst43rdvxs.jpg

Household recycling rates will flat-line as there is only a finite amount of stuff that can be recycled e.g massive polystyrene slabs from boxed electrical goods cannot.

It is up to the individual to address this issue (like many others we blame the nanny state for) but when, for example, builders just dump their sandwich and drink containers in a plastic carrier on to the road and drive away what hope is there?

The %age of waste recycled is a function of the volume of waste that is recyclable - if I 'generate' 10 tons of waste one year, of which 60% (6 tons) is recyclable - and recycle it - and the next year 'generate 11 tons, still with 6 tons recyclable and recycled, has my recycling stayed the same, or gone down? I have now recycled only 54% of my waste (down from 60%) whilst still recycling all I can and the same weight. We are in the hands of suppliers as to how much packaging etc. can be recycled. More recyclable packaging (or less packaging overall) is not in the hands of the consumer. I have seen figures for % waste recycled - but not of % recyclable waste recycled. In terms of public take-up and commitment it is the latter figure which is important. [And, as a side issue, is the important figure weight or volume - as regards land-fill I might suggest volume?]

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Unfortunately there are two ways of examining this, if we even had the figures. The first is simply to look at the revenues paid to the Council and see if the costs (in terms of setting it up and recovery from it, including administrative cost) are less than the revenues. This would be quite simple to do assuming we could agree the proper allocation of those costs. But additionally we have the amenity cost to those Southwark residents either (a) losing amenity value through e.g. disruption, and secondly losing amenity value by being excluded from parts of a public park for an extended period in summer. That is not a fiscal cost to the council and clearly they don't give a damn, but that would be the only way of judging whether this event was of overall net benefit to Southwark residents, the only people who the council should be 'working' for. Don't hold your breaths. 
    • Think it might have been this: https://metro.co.uk/2025/12/05/mystery-bangs-traumatised-londoners-last-night-25170083/
    • I need a trundle bed! 2 single beds that convert into one double bed. Preferably wooden. If you have one that you no longer use/would like to sell, please get in touch via PM.  Thank you 
    • Dulwich College had the "luck" of those allegations landing right in the middle of COVID when the media and everyone else was a bit distracted. And then to make double sure the discontent was suppressed, it threatened kids who wanted to demonstrate with police action. The kids at the time said: "Dulwich College has for years totally ignored, dismissed and condoned by turning a blind eye, this predatory behaviour by students... A protest was students’ only way to pressure the headmaster to actually tackle the sexual violence at his school.” The march by pupils of several schools was advertised on social media as “a demonstration against the predatory culture of Dulwich College and the school management [which] condones it". https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/mar/26/dulwich-college-head-warns-pupils-over-culture-protest
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...