This is quite amazing, how and why did the Lib Dems see fit to endorse the multitude of errors that have occured under Cllr Hall's stewardship. After all, that is what a 'vote of confidence' is, an endorsement.

Well done to those Lib Dems who at least saw fit to abstain. But mostly, well done the Conservatives for trying to hold Cllr Hall to account!

I simply cannot believe my local paper reports in this manner, I am getting quite fed-up of listening to all the comments on waste and Cllr Hall. Why should I be penalised for not having a garden? I love the glass collection!

What is that toryboy Scully talking about? Nobody in Sutton has to pay £35. Anybody with a garden can compost their waste. Anyone too idle to do that can take their waste to one of the two recycling sites.

I think we are forgetting that the Tories agreed to the changes in waste policy.

Graham sums it up no-one has to pay the charge and if people did not sit outside the RRC before it opened the queues wouldn't be so bad. I have a resonable sized garden take my garden waste to work and drop it off after work no massive wait. The ya-boo Tories really need to realise that bringing in a pack to a meeting not allowing anyone to speak is not going to help.

Dan
Wrong the Tories did not agree to the £35 charge..get your facts right.
How about everybody in the borough who now has to put up with smoke from bonfires every evening.Well done Lib Dems for thinking this one through.
As for Yah-Boo Politics..As Carly Simon sang.
"Nobody does it Better" thyan the men and women from orange county.
Roll on the next election.This is your 10p debacle.
Farewell.

Graham..what a chess like brain you must have.
What happens if your composter is full and you dont have a car?
Think about it..just for a second.
There that didnt hurt too much did it.
Put your wooly jumper back on and grow a beard.Then when one is old and the other is shaved off compost them both.

Niamh
You really must read up on your Lib Dem history.
You see between 1982 and 1986 they were masters at bringing rent a mob to council meetings and stifling debate.
Yhe difference last night was that it was the Lib Dems who tried to stifle the debate by negating the motion.
Now theres free speech and democracy in action for you.

Niamh,

You say a pack was in the public gallery at the meeting? I understand they were local residents fed up with the Lib Dems. It's spin to try and suggest they were all there at the Tories' behest.

Gloria wrote:
I simply cannot believe my local paper reports in this manner, I am getting quite fed-up of listening to all the comments on waste and Cllr Hall. Why should I be penalised for not having a garden? I love the glass collection!

Gloria is still being “penalised.” Had Gloria been at the meeting she would have heard Councillor Hall admit, in response to a tabled question by a member of the public, that this disastrous garden collection policy is costing every council tax payer in Sutton money and that council tax payers are subsiding every one of the new garden waste green bags by between £50 and £100.

The whole point here is that the Lib Dems probably knew that they would never have residents to subscribe to a kerbside glass collection and so decided to give them Hobson,s choice... pay up to £105 to have garden waste collected or spent a fortune in petrol, time and energy in carting bags of rubbish down to the tip when it is open. The Lib Dems thought that they would sell 38,000 of the little green bags and that they would fleece Sutton residents out of a net £1.3 million. Money which used to be used to pay for the garden waste collection would be diverted to pay for the glass collection and those residents with gardens, who often live in higher council tax band house and who sometimes pay twice as much of the Band D tax, would be forced to take on board this additional charge.... foe some that would mean the equivalent of a 10% increase in council tax. The problem for the Lib Dem council is that almost 90% of the household that they intended to fleece have seen through their scheme, have refused to co-operate and that the council has now 33,000 unsold bags that Councillor Hall admitted on Monday evening were of no commercial value to anyone else as they had the Sutton logo printed on them.

The whole sorry escapade has been a financial, environmental and public relations disaster for the LIB Dems. On Monday night the infuriated the public gallery, including their own supporters, when they first tried to avoid having to debate the motion, being angry and tetchy when they received legal advice, indulging in irrelevant jah-boo politics which you can listen to once the recording is available on the council web site, and at the very best damming Councillor Hall with faint praise.

Gloria needs to look at the bigger picture. The idea of trying to use householders with gardens as a money cow has failed. The idea is costing every council tax paying household in the borough money and has alienated a considerable number of people in the very wards that Lib Dems have a slender majority and when they need to return councillors next time if they are to retain their majority. Speaking as a long term Lib Dem supporter, the Lib Dems needed to rethink and come up with a quick immediate fix, like reinstating the harden waste collection service until the September review is completed. They’ve not done that and they shouldn’t be surprised if resentment continues to build up during the summer as compost bins overflow with vegetation that will take three years to break down into anything useable.

i was there at the meeting and i was horrified when one of the lib dems leaders told us all to shut up as members of the public, what incredible arrogance!

THEY WORK FOR US, NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND

The council have also spent tens of thousands on the Smarter Travel Sutton campaign which is about discouraging car use and on the other hand they encourage car use for many residents living in their flats for whom they are unable to provide recycling collections, I've asked for a reduction in my council tax to cover the cost of the petrol, silly question of course, so not only are we covering the cost for the rest of the boroughs recycle collections from our council tax but we're having to pay extra to recycle or send it all to landfill. Our council is all about being seen to win merit through pointless government schemes and actually care very little about what the residents want, that's why the housing 'arms length' (how appropriate) organisation rate as 1 star, the council knew what they were doing distancing themselves from them.

Graham

You do have to pay £35 if you want a sack...it's a joke.

Niamh

I was at the meeting after I saw it on the Guardian website. I am not part of a "pack" or a "rent-a-mob" just one fuming resident.

The charge isn't doing what it should. Only 5000 bags have been sold and another dump has been opened in Beddington so the scheme is losing money hand over fist rather than helping to pay for the glass collection.

Graham, yes people can take their garden waste to the tip, that is if they have a car, and secondly if they are nimble enough to negotiate the steep steps, high piled bins and unhelpful staff. If the steps are wet they become very dangerous especially for the elderly or weak. I take it that you are neither of the above or you may have some more consideration.

What is so annoying is the money wasted on this ill thought out policy, the money now spent on a so called consultation, and the fact that they still do not think that their policy is wrong despite the consultation seemingly offering alternatives other than that imposed.

It also seems on a similar thread that under the freedom of information act that in fact the council have been composting garden waste and that none is currently sent to landfill sites so if the old system had continued there would have been no cost to the council in any event.

In short this is simply a short sighted attempt to fleece the electorate and it seems from responses that the council has been rumbled yet wants to continue with its policy, presumably thinking that we are so stupid we will forget come election time.

It should be noted that most properties in the borough have gardens but only a few of them are occupied by gardeners. They just grow a few plants and trees and keeps things tidy. The idea that these people can compost most of their garden waste using one small free composter is nonsense.

The instructions, that come with the composters, state quite clearly that you cannot simply mow the lawn and empty the grass into the composter as you will not get compost. You will get slime. It also states that evergreen clippings should only be put in in small quantities. It tells you not to put leaves in it. It also tells you to turn the material over. This would prove to be very difficult as the composter has a small opening relative to the depth.

It is clear, therefore, that these composters are not suitable for composting all of the garden waste and can only be used for a small fraction of the waste produced by the average garden. The garden waste bags, now being used, have a very small openeing and the lawn mower's grass box will not fit into them.

The idea that people with no gardens should not pay for those with them is clearly nonsense. I do not have any children of school age. Should I not have to pay for those who do? The point is that the Council are expected to provide services for all, whether everyone needs them or not. They have a duty of care.

As for Councillor Hall. He was responsible for penalty charge notices being issued on New Years day 2005. There were 297 issued but only 7 were waved. The Adjudicator called it petty, mean sprited, unlawful and warned of costs and consequences if it evr happened again. Colin Hall stated "The Council intends to challenge the Adjudicator." There was no challenge. He also stated, when asked to refund the unlawfully extracted monies from inocent motorists, "Parking Services do not have any resources". This is clearly untrue. The information is held on a data base. If you are in doubt about his attitude to the public, he is meant to serve, he also stated "It is possible that the public would view the refund of monies as an admission of a mistake."

Bill Urmenyi