WBC ADMITS SACK INCLUDES DISPOSAL
Wokingham Borough Council has finally admitted that the charge for their tiny, skinny new sacks will actually include the price of disposal contravening Schedule 2 of CWR 1992.
At a charge of 40 pence per sack as opposed to the 3 pence per sack from a supermarket, the additional charge can only be for disposal bearing in mind that the crappy WBC sacks are 18 micron (super thin) and designed to burst thus necessitating the purchase of additional sacks .
IN MEMORY OF
Paddy Higgins
GID'S NIB
A couple of wrinklies have won £25 Million on the Euro Lottery saying that it's not going to change their lives.
Silly bastards, make them give it back.
2080
Rainy winters snug by the fire, sunny hot summers like Spain growing olives, grapes, lemons and limes; this is climate change - don't listen to them - they're talking bollocks.
HARMAN BACKS BROWN
Harman tells reporters: Like every sturdy knocker, this Country needs a knob and Gordon's the best man for the job.
WELL DONE PIERRE
A big thank you to Pierre, Jean Paul, Luc and Marco, the four Froggie fishermen for starving Britain of goods over the last few days - that's not 'French' at all is it?
HELLO
Please follow one of the many links scattered around to the Orangutan charities.
Posts
16 comments:
Rubbish!
The cost of the extra blue 25 micron 80 litre bags in rolls of 10 will be £4 per roll of 10 to include delivery, printing and all administration thereby not including any contribution to collection or disposal so it is compliant with legislation.
Surely 'administration' is also a cost of disposal. The current cost of administration for disposal is not separated from the actual disposal costs. They all fall into the same department budget.
WBC are definitely playing with semantics here to hide a charge for waste disposal.
Delivery, printing and administration at a cost of 37 pence per sack would be extremely inefficient at best. In reality this is a disposal charge and you know it is?
Bearing in mind that WBC cannot specify the actual supplier anyway this is a charge that should not even be considered.
Sacks you buy in supermarkets exceed 40 micron - not fit for purpose WBC.
Why don't you send a freedom of information request to WBC asking for the cost of admin' prining and delivery?
Steve this is interesting point, yes there would be an administration cost relating to the disposal. The council would have a administration cost relating to the supply of additional sacks, however, this would be a tiny, for a well run administration machine like Wokingham BC, if not then questions should be asked.
I don’t understand the 40 micron not fit for purpose comment?
This is a disposal charge and WBC is trying to hide the fact so they don't go against even more legislation.
Which bit of WBC do you work for Anonymous 1?
Wokingham Borough Council is trying to increase the amount of recycling in the borough. People like you taking any opportunity to knock them should be ashamed of yourself. What does it matter whether the bag cost includes disposal anyway?
It matters because it's against the law - see previous posts - see Schedule 2 of CWR 1992.
WBC cannot specify the supplier of waste container - only the type.
How much would amazon charge to deliver a roll of binbags?
£22.31 for 200 Heavy Duty sacks - not the shitty 18 micron (25 micron according to WBC insider) - that's 11 pence each but doesn't include the disposal like the WBC sack.
I hope these council bags will be able to take heavy coal ash,about 30kg a bag same as I put out now in my metal bin?
'heavy coal ash' - enjoy your pavement as it is now - post April I fear it will no longer be visible due to being covered in heavy coal ash.
Post a Comment