Minutes:
The committee noted that £50.5 million investment in new recycling infrastructure was approved by Hampshire County Council. This would enable the collection of pots, tubs, trays, and cartons going forward, with this project expected to take around 2 ½ years to build, and a potential completion around October 2027. Hampshire had informed DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) that they are likely to be delayed in meeting the Government's April 2026 deadline for collecting pots, tubs, trays, and cartons on this basis. In addition, the Government was still planning to implement a deposit return scheme by October 2027. In total these new recycling options could improve recycling levels by approximately 10%.
It was reported that food waste recycling was planned to be phased in at every household property by March 2026. Nine food waste vehicles had been ordered, with collections aimed to start on a round-by-round basis during October 2025. It was anticipated this would generate a further 10% improvement to the recycling rate. The committee noted that the council had one fully electric vehicle that was currently being tested and trialled within the local area. The Corporate Head of Service: Place advised that an update on food waste progress would be reported back to the committee at its meeting in September 2025.
Winchester had received an indicative figure from the Government that it expected a net figure of £830,000 in the year 2025/2026 from extended producer responsibility.
Councillor Learney discussed Project Integra, a partnership created to manage waste and recycling across Hampshire and reminded the committee that in early 2022, the council had agreed to a twin stream waste collection system. At its recent meeting, Project Integra had discussed costs but failed to reach an agreement, with some districts hesitant to switch to twin stream collections based on initial costs. Hampshire County Council had agreed to hold one-to-one meetings with districts in this regard. The council supported a move to the materials recycling facility (MRF) project and encouraged other authorities to adopt twin stream collections.
The committee proceeded to ask questions and comment on the following matters which were responded to by the Cabinet Member and the Corporate Head of Service: Place.
(i) Residual waste that currently goes to incineration would not be affected by twin streaming. It was recognised that there was significant work to be carried out on waste reduction to establish how much more could be taken from residual bins.
(ii) Food waste processing through an anaerobic digestion facility and biogas: It was noted that disposal was a Hampshire County Council responsibility.
(iii) Food waste vehicles: These would be fuelled using HVO (hydrotreated vegetable oil) due to insufficient capacity at the depot for a fully electric fleet.
(iv) With twin stream, all containers including glass would go into the recycling bin, with the glass collection replaced by a paper and card collection bin.
(v) Hampshire County Council still had decisions to make regarding the level of automation for the new MRF. They were looking for a decision by the end of March in order to meet a number of deadlines to move the project forward.
(vi) If certain levels of efficiency and effectiveness were not met, the government may reduce extended producer responsibility funding.
(vii) Recurring costs, such as renewing fleets or replacing bottle bins, if the current collection regime continued.
(viii) With the addition of a paper and card bin, the physical space needed for bins will be a challenge for some properties. It was anticipated that storage may be a problem for some, depending on the size of the property (such as blocks of flats using communal bins etc). Following the introduction of food waste collections which would take place on a weekly basis, there would be analysis carried out to establish the frequency of other collections.
(ix) Would people be able to take their items to a retailer and get a 20p deposit? As a consumer, for extended producer responsibility they would not get any money back. However, in respect of the deposit return scheme for plastic bottled drinks and cans, there would be a nominal price increase to the consumer upon purchase, but when the empty product was returned by the consumer to a hosted collection location, this cost would be reimbursed. The deposit return scheme did not include glass bottles and was only applicable to plastic drink bottles and cans.
During debate, the committee noted that:
- the final decision on co-mingling versus twin stream had not been formally made, but that the likely direction would be twin stream collections.
- the initial extra costs of twin stream were, £72 million less over 10 years comparing a twin stream rather than co-mingled collections.
- supported the council’s approach to move the MRF project forward and encourage all other authorities to adopt twin stream collections.
At the conclusion of debate, the committee thanked officers and the Cabinet Member for an informative update.
RESOLVED:
That the update be received and the comments raised by the committee, as summarised above, be noted.