Re. HOUSEHOLD WASTE
I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE MEASURES IMPLEMENTED BY THE COUNCIL CONCERNING THE ABOVE, PARTICULARLY THE EFFECT ON THE ELDERLY AND DISABLED.
1) A LADY MOVED INTO THE HOUSE OPPOSITE ME AND BECAUSE SHE HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN HER WHEELIE BINS SHE DECIDED TO WALK OVER THE ROAD AND PUT HER RUBBISH IN MINE. AS MY BIN WAS VIRTUALLY FULL IT MEANT THE LID WAS WIDE OPEN AND COULD HAVE RESULTED IN MY RECEIVING A HEAVY FINE, PARTICULARLY AS IT WAS NEAR THE TIME FOR COLLECTION. FORTUNATELY MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOUR SPOTTED IT AND DEALT WITH IT. IT ALSO OCCURRED TO ME THAT SOME ONE BEARING A GRUDGE AGAINST AN INDIVIDUAL COULD INDULGE IN SIMILAR BEHAVIOUR TO EXACT REVENGE.
2) A MAN ON MY ESTATE DECIDED TO REPLACE TWO INTERIOR DOORS. HE TOOK THE OLD DOORS TO THE COUNCIL SITE AT CAISTER. HE WAS INFORMED BY ONE OF THE OPERATIVES THAT HE COULD ONLY DUMP ONE AND THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO RETURN THE FOLLOWING DAY IF HE WISHED TO DISPOSE OF THE OTHER. BEARING IN MIND IT IS APPROXIMATELY A ROUND TRIP OF 18 MILES EACH JOURNEY I FAIL TO SEE ANY JUSTIFICATION IN THAT.
3) I RECENTLY VISITED THE SITE IN CAISTER AND JOINED A QUEUE WAITING TO OFFLOAD RUBBISH. A LARGE ARTICULATED LORRY HAD ARRIVED TO DISPOSE OF PREVIOUS WASTE AND WE HAD TO WAIT FOR MORE THAN HALF AN HOUR TO USE THE FACILITY. I WAS ANXIOUS TO GET HOME AS MY DISABLED WIFE WAS ILL AND NEEDED MY ASSISTANCE. WHILE WAITING I ENGAGED IN CONVERSATION WITH THE DRIVER IN FRONT OF ME. HE INFORMED ME THAT HE HAD LIVED CLOSE BY FOR THE LAST TWENTY YEARS. DURING THAT TIME TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE THE FACILITY HAD NOT BEEN EXTENDED OR MODERNISED IN ANY WAY. HE GAINED THE IMPRESSION FROM THE LOCAL MEDIA THAT THE CAISTER SITE IS THE MOST WIDELY USED FACILITY IN NORFOLK.
4) ONE OF THE DUSTMEN INFORMED ME THAT THEY HAD BEEN GIVEN A CIRCULAR WHICH STATED THAT 38P PER PERSON PER WEEK WAS ACTUALLY SPENT ON WASTE DISPOSAL. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THIS IS THE CASE, BEARING IN MIND THAT THE COUNCIL TAX ON MY HOUSE IS £I8OO A YEAR. WHEN IT WAS INITIALLY INTRODUCED WE WERE TOLD THAT HALF WAS TO BE USED FOR POLICE THE OTHER HALF FOR WASTE DISPOSAL. THAT EQUATES TO £900 PER ANNUM. MOST PEOPLE ARE WELL AWARE OF THE PROBLEMS FACING COUNCILS IN THE DISPOSAL OF WASTE. THE HIGH COST AND SUITABLE LIMITED DISPOSAL SITES. PLUS REDUCED FUNDING FROM CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. WE HAVE NOT BEEN RESPONSIBLE STEWARDS OF THIS PLANET, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE ARE TOLD THERE IS AN ISLAND OF RUBBISH BIGGER THAN FRANCE FLOATING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ATLANTIC OCEAN.
5) HOWEVER MOST CONSUMERS RESENT USING THEIR PRISTINE CARS AS COUNCIL DUST CARTS TO REMOVE RUBBISH WHICH SCRATCHES PAINTWORK, TEARS UPHOLSTERY AND CAUSES UNACCEPTABLE ODOURS IN THEIR VEHICLES. A VISIT TO ONE OF THESE SITES ALSO INVOLVES DRIVING OVER UNEVEN GROUND WHICH COULD CONTAIN SHARDS OF GLASS OR RUSTY NAILS.
6) ON ONE OCCASION I WRAPPED UP LEFT-OVERS FROM A LAMB JOINT AND PLACED IT IN THE BIN. JUST BEFORE THE BINMEN WERE DUE, I NOTICED IT WAS CRAWLING WITH WHITE MAGGOTS. PLEASE CAN WE RETURN TO WEEKLY COLLECTIONS! THIS IS A SERIOUS HEALTH RISK.
7) ANOTHER LADY ON MY ESTATE HAS TO TRAVEL TO LOWESTOFT TO SORT OUT THE RUBBISH OF HER ELDERLY FATHER EVERY WEEK. SHE ALREADY HAS HEAVY COMMITMENTS, AND IT ADDS TO HER STRESS LEVELS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE RESPONSIBILITY AND COST IS BEING TRANSFERRED TO THE CONSUMER.
8) PLUS THE THREAT OF HEAVY FINES FOR THE SLIGHTEST INFRINGEMENT ON OUR PART IS A STRESSFUL FACTOR THAT AGED AND DISABLED PEOPLE CAN DO WITHOUT.
Content provided by a member of the public - name and address withheld
If you have a comment please use the 'Add Comment' link under 'Other Related Links' at the bottom of this page.
