The Warden from the River Thames Society and the Thames21 Development Manager gave their presentation to the Cleaner, Greener and Safer Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding the efforts of partner organisations and volunteers within Thurrock.  The Committee heard what had taken place over the past year and what the aims should be for the year ahead.

The Committee thanked both Clive Webster and Emma Harrington for their presentation, and for the work they have done in Thurrock.  The Chair asked what the Council could do to be of most help and how residents could get involved.  It was suggested that the Council could employ staff to monitor littering activity on the ground and a network of intelligence could be developed.  Local residents could get involved through a number of organisations but Grays Phoenix were especially keen.  Thames21 were happy to invest time training local residents but there needed to be a longer term plan; the reality was it was hoped more could be done.

Councillor Jones was keen to learn what response had been received from their work with schools.  Members were advised that sessions were run on the water cycle as well as the flow of litter, and as children always seemed fascinated it was hoped they might go home and influence their families.  The reality was however that children could only do so much and older generations needed to be involved as well.

Councillor Collins referred to comments around water sampling and queried who was responsible for analysing samples and what the water quality in Thurrock was.  The Committee was informed that Thames21 trained Citizen Scientists to test water samples for temperature, turbidity, phosphorus and other chemicals.  These trained volunteers were given testing kits and it was their responsibility to take readings and upload the data.  The Committee heard that the Thames Tideway Tunnel would make a big difference but the contributory rivers were influential.  The situation was improving and there seemed to be increased awareness but there was still far more to be done.

Councillor Piccolo suggested that sometimes local residents could be the best at monitoring their local area so perhaps the Council could introduce a hotline or some option on the website to report issues, but the Committee heard that certain areas with build-up were unseen by the public as they were along tidelines.  It was suggested that the Environmental Enforcement teams might be utilised to monitor areas with high levels of food waste. EH sought clarity regarding the Environmental Enforcement team and whether they were responsible solely for penalty notices or whether they would be responsible for clearing the litter too.  Enforcement Officers were responsible for issuing Fixed-Penalty Notices and the clearing of rubbish fell to the street cleaning teams.

The Vice-Chair informed the Committee that he had taken part in one of the litter pick days and had found the experience very rewarding.  As he had previously been an unpaid work supervisor for the probation service he wondered whether it had ever been considered to work with probation groups.  The Committee heard that it had been an idea once but never happened, however there was also the issue of how to enthuse local residents to get involved; if there were probation groups there it may seem punitive. The Vice-Chair reiterated how rewarding he had found the experience and that it might also be beneficial for those on probation to be working alongside “decent people”, for want of a better expression.

The Chair asked, in terms of hopes to change behaviour, whether there were any particular schemes to link into the work of the Council.  It was advised that fixed campaigns would be the best way.  The Corporate Director for Environment and Place agreed that the Council should synchronise with organisations such as the River Thames Society and Thames 21, the recent “Bin it” campaign had been a success so there was no reason it should not be broadened to cover the riverfronts and shorelines.

The Committee heard that there was an issue of where to prioritise when arranging picks, as it was important not to spread resources too far.  As there was a roughly 50:50 split between tidal deposits and domestic litter the Council would have to focus on littering within Thurrock, as very little could be done to influence the deposits from contributory rivers to the Thames.