Despite the boasts of high recycling rates on Conservative election leaflets, recycling rates in Lincolnshire have plummeted since 2010 according to national recycling league tables.
In the County of Lincolnshire, the total rate of waste diverted from landfill has fallen every year for seven years from 53% in 2010 to 43% in 2018. The rate in South Kesteven has fallen every year resulting in a similar 10% reduction in overall rates which includes recycling through the silver and green bins.
The figure for 2017/18 has not yet been formally published but information data published by SKDC under a freedom of information request suggests that the percentage has now fallen to significantly below 40% (38.57% to be precise).
The main cause of the falling rates is the Conservative austerity measures which have had a massive impact on Council funding especially at Lincolnshire where local Tories decided to withdraw Recycling Credits which removed the incentive for many organisations to recycle.
In the Open Forum it was reported that SKDC Culture Committee is working at opening up the festivals held in the four towns to a wider audience. Also SKDC continues to hold a healthy level of reserves of £28 million as at 31 March 2019, for the General Fund. Within this figure is a specific allocation of £1.5 million to deal with any unforeseen fluctuations in annual expenditure. In terms of the annual accounts audit inspection, the council received a positive opinion for the last financial year, and fully expect a positive value for money opinion to be presented to the next Governance and Audit Committee meeting on 25 September.
Following the heavy storms and recent flooding members were pleased to be told that local flood defences are designed to protect the area for the next 100 years.
After many months of hard work a “Four Year Strategic Plan,” was…
Recycling efforts in South Kesteven are being undermined by increasing levels of contamination of the weekly silver bin recycling system. Recently released figures reveal that, since 2016, contamination rates have gradually increased from 20% to over 30% meaning that almost a third of so-called ‘recycling’ ends up in landfill.
There are a number of factors causing the contamination including:
A few days before the SKDC Full Council meeting of 25th July, I heard rumours that the knives were out for the Leader of the Council, Cllr Matthew Lee (Con). On the day it seemed that Cllr Lee had survived the alleged insurgency and all of the Conservatives were extremely well-behaved. In fact, I don’t think a single Conservative, other than Cabinet Members made any comment or question during the meeting except in response to specific questions[i].
However, just 10 days after the meeting it was announced ‘out
of the blue’ that Cllr Lee had resigned
as Leader of the Council. Independent
Councillors received no notification, let alone explanation, from Cllr Lee
himself but opposition group leaders received a cursory note from the Deputy
Leader, Cllr Kelham Cooke (Con) as follows:
“I am writing to you today to inform you that Matthew has resigned with immediate effect as Leader of the Conservative Group. As per the Conservative Group Constitution, I am now Acting Group Leader…”[ii]
Here are some of the reasons why Cllr Lee might have chosen to resign. They are pure speculation on my part but in the absence of any detailed explanation from either the Council, the Conservative Group or Cllr Lee himself, it’s the best I can offer.
Regular readers will know that I have previously been critical of the Council circumventing proper recruitment procedures by shoulder-tapping individuals and handing them jobs without formal advertising or competitive interview.
I am pleased to confirm that the recent appointment of a position of “Strategic Communications and Policy Lead (Housing)” was recruited by a formal process. Remuneration for the post is £54,468 per annum (pro rata) with excellent benefits .
The initial staff requisition was signed off by the relevant
Cabinet Member for Housing who was subsequently defeated in the District
Council elections in May.
The role was advertised on three external jobs websites as well as the Council’s own website. The advert was first published in the public domain on Friday 12th April and the closing date for applications was Tuesday 23rd April which allowed a full seven working days for people to apply for the position (assuming they found it within the timescale which fell amid the season of election campaigning).
Given the level of remuneration (over £50k plus benefits), it is perhaps surprising that only two people applied for the role and only one was shortlisted for interview.
By contrast, a recent recruitment for a ‘Head of Leisure’ at SKDC attracted nearly 20 applications although this was via a recruitment consultancy and the post was advertised for almost a month.
Nevertheless, congratulations are due to the successful applicant who has previous experience of working in the Communications Team at South Kesteven albeit as an external consultant with Emulus Communications Ltd. Small world though, innit!?
Report to MDTC Full Council 12th July 2019 from ASHLEY BAXTER, one of the ten Councillors forming the Independent Group at SKDC.
I am pleased to report that, less than two months after the elections, one of the Conservatives has resigned the whip and become ‘Independent unaligned’. This means there are now 17 opposition councillors compared to 39 Tories. We just need 11 more defections and the Council will be on a knife-edge!
I have attended four formal Council meetings during the lastmonth.
This meeting was held to consider the call-in request that I had organised before the election in light of a decision by Cllr Adam Stokes (Con) to allocate money from the new Invest-to-save fund. Before the meeting I had submitted more than 20 written questions and I was pleased to discover that newly-elected Cllr Whittington (Con) had submitted some of his own. Continue reading →
On 27th June, I proposed a motion that South Kesteven District Council should adopt the Woodland Trust’s Charter for Trees and develop a tree strategy to protect, improve and enhance the number and quality of trees in the District. Conservatives at South Kesteven tied themselves up in knots in order to prevent an Independent-led proposal from being passed.
The Tree Charter can be signed by individuals and also by organisations. More than 70 organisations and 300 local community groups have signed up to the Charter including at least two Parish Councils in the South Kesteven area have already signed up (Deeping St James and Barkston and Syston). However, meaning no disrespect to the Woodland Trust and their partners, the Charter for Trees is a relatively bland statement of commitment to protecting and promoting trees, forest and hedgerows, in fact one of my Independent colleagues described parts of it as ‘airy-fairy’. It is more a statement of attitude and intent rather than a detailed program of actions.
I argued that signing up to the Charter would demonstrate the Council’s commitment to trees, biodiversity and also to the Woodland Trust which is the leading national charity on this issue and is based in Grantham.
I was gobsmacked when the SKDC Cabinet Member responsible for Environment, Cllr Peter Moseley (Con) decided to oppose the motion. He suggested three reasons why Councillors should vote against it, all of which were spurious. Continue reading →
South Kesteven Council descended into chaos yesterday when
the Chairman and Deputy Leader failed to give direct answers to a simple
question about the time of the meeting. The consequent debate lasted a full 10
minutes purely because a decision had been taken by the Conservative group
without any consultation with the rest of the Council.
Cllr Lee Steptoe (Lab) (LS)
raised the original question with the Deputy Leader of the Council, Coun Kelham
Cooke (Con) (KC) because the Leader, Cllr
Matthew Lee (Con) had decided to take a holiday which prevented him from
attending Full Council.
Here’s what was said:
LS: “I believe that the meeting times for Full Council were changed after the last meeting. Historically I believe that meetings have always started at 2pm. That has now been moved forward to 1pm. Can I ask what consultation within the Council and the public was made on this issue? Members of the public do attend. Some of us work full-time as well as being elected members and it’s a lot of hassle quite frankly to book time off and so on. It is a personal inconvenience – I’m sure I’ll get over it – but what consultation took place with elected members and with the public before this decision was arrived at?
KC: “Thank you Madam Chairman and thank you Cllr Steptoe. Obviously it is not for me to dictate to any Chairman of any Committee or even to this Council as to what time they meet. The Chairman, Cllr Jacky Smith (JS), took the decision to move that meeting to 1pm. Personally, I also work full-time and I know that a number of people in this room also have young families and children so it gives them the ability to pick their children up from school. But it is ultimately up to the Chairman.
Cllr Baxter (AB): “Thank you Madam Chairman, may I ask the same question to the Chair of the Council?
JS: “Yes there were some discussions and it was agreed that we would try it to see how it went. There was quite a feeling that we ought to move the meeting People do have to go and collect children from school. It is to try to ensure that we get the maximum number of people attending the Council meeting.
(AB): “Madam Chairman, the question was “Who was consulted and when?” because I wasn’t consulted and I don’t think Cllr Steptoe was consulted either?
JS: Any other
Cllr Knowles (PK):
Can we have an answer to the last question, please?
JS: “The question has been put and I have answered it to the best of my abilities…
(Loud mutterings of “really?”
from the floor)
PK: Who was
consulted, Madam Chairman?
JS: “The question has been put and I have answered it. It was discussed among a number of people and it was agreed to move the time.
There then followed a number of interventions including from Cllr Bosworth (Con) who said she supported the change of time and from last year’s Chair, Cllr Stevens Con) who begged to differ with Cllr Bosworth and suggested the whole Council should be consulted. The Chair then continued:
JS: “It was discussed. We had quite a few comments about having it at a different time. I know the Leader of the Council was involved in the discussions and a number of other people were involved. (Cries of “Who?”) It is also the Chairman’s decision. I agreed, because there were a number of requests for it, to try it. Now we can have further discussions, we can take more soundings. There were Council members who were involved (Cries of “Who?”). I think what this is indicating that we need to do, with the leader and deputy leader, is to set up some method of having further discussions but we can’t at any time please everyone.
There then followed further comments and chaotic discussion
about whether the issue should be referred to Constitution Committee, whether
the Council had become an autocracy and one Councillor claimed that members
were being disrespectful to the Chair.
It was then asserted that the decision to move the time of
the meeting had already been discussed and decided by Full Council. This was
The Chair concluded the debate by proposing that the 1pm
start would be retained for a year in order to establish the impact on
attendance and then the decision should be reviewed next year.
The purpose of this post is to inform, educate and entertain. If you find this kind of post interesting, please hit the like button or share it on social media. This will give me an indication of whether such detailed feedback from Council meetings is useful. It is quite time-consuming but I have only related this particular incident because I am still so upset about the attitude and conduct of senior Conservatives in relation to the very next item on the agenda which was “Charter for Trees”. Another blogpost coming soon!