For many of you, this week will be a busy one as the countdown to the start of food waste collections gets even closer. All the hard work you’ve put in over recent months will finally begin to pay off. I’ll share more on that next time, when services will be in full flow for many members, but for now I just want to acknowledge that the finishing line is in sight.
Since my last blog, things have been quite busy. I’ve been discussing Simpler Recycling with the ESA and DEFRA, meeting with the Environment Agency about Digital Waste Tracking, and exploring ETS through the ESA’s Emissions Trading Scheme Sector Group.
One of my busiest weeks involved a series of meetings alongside our Policy Officer, Tom McBeth who, by the end of it, was probably sick of the sight of me. Together we spoke with representatives from across the UK, covering our attendance at the Northern Ireland Waste & Resource Management Conference 2026, the Wales consultation on amendments to pEPR relating to street‑binned and littered packaging waste, and holding our regular call with DEFRA.
I also chaired the LARAC webinar AI That Actually Helps before heading to London for the Energy from Waste Conference, where I joined a panel discussing waste crime alongside Dr Anna Willetts, CIWM Trustee and Past-President.
While Anna spoke about the impact of waste crime on legitimate businesses, I focused on its effect on local authorities particularly the way councils are left managing public perception and environmental consequences, often for issues they did not cause.
We know many LARAC members are facing serious waste crime challenges, including major fly‑tipping incidents. Waste crime is highly visible and often triggers strong emotional responses from residents, who tend to bundle fly‑tipping, antisocial behaviour and general poor behaviour together. This means councils bear the brunt of frustration even when they are not responsible.
Waste crime is not just an eyesore it causes real long‑term environmental harm. Mixed‑waste fires create air‑quality and safety issues; illegal sites contaminate land, water and nature; and tackling these incidents diverts council funding away from recycling and wider environmental goals. Rogue operators undercut compliant businesses and damage the whole system, while fires, re‑collections and lost recycling add to the carbon burden.
As I said during the panel, enforcement efforts need rebalancing. Local authority sites are already compliant and easy to inspect, but too often face disproportionate scrutiny over minor technicalities. Meanwhile, large‑scale high‑harm operations continue with limited intervention. LA sites should be treated as partners, not low‑risk targets. What we need is intelligence‑led enforcement that must focus on high‑harm operators.
