1. What are the main aims purpose and outcomes of the Policy and how do these fit with the wider aims of the organization?

Why are we doing this, what do we hope to be achieved

Proposal to cease provision of the freighter service in order to:

• Save £40,000 per annum (as part of MBC’s MTFS response to the Government’s local government settlement)
• Increase MBC’s recycling percentage by 0.2% per annum, thus assisting the legal requirement to achieve the EU 50% recycling target by 2020 (noting that not doing so would incure probable further financial penalties). (NB MBC achieved 49.1% in 2014/15.)
• Bring MBC in line with the practice of the vast majority of district councils in Kent
• Address the inequality whereby only a tiny proportion (4%) of the borough’s 162,000  residents (regardless of protected characteristic) benefit from a virtual kerbside bulky waste removal service at the 99 freighter sites currently in use, effectively subsidised by the vast majority of council tax payers
• Remove the opportunity for abuse of this supposedly residential service by commercial entities

These targeted outcomes address the MBC wider aims of maintaining financial stability for the council and achieving our headline Recycling KPI.

2. How do these aims affect our duty to:

·         Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimization and other conduct prohibited by the act.

·         Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

·         Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

The second of the three duties is engaged in that we will eliminate the random untargeted nature of the current Freighter Service and have a greater focus on offering a competitive rate Book a Bulky Service to all residents regardless of protected characteristics.  Additionally we will review the policy options for offering a discounted Book a Bulky service to targeted groups of residents in receipt of specific benefits (which are by implication far more likely to positively affect aged and disabled residents).

3. What aspects of the policy including how it is delivered or accessed could contribute to inequality?

The current service – with very few exceptions – reinforces inequality, as it is still largely reliant on people being mobile and/or able-bodied.

Consideration of discounted options for targeted groups would at least give MBC the chance to review what more they could do toassist those with protected characteristics.

Cessation of the service will reduce inequality.

4. Will the policy have an impact (positive or negative) upon the lives of people, including particular communities and groups who have protected characteristics ? What evidence do you have for this?

Removal of the freighter service will not have a particularly negative impact on particular communities across MBC as a whole. (Excepting those able-bodied individuals with their own transport who make up the vast majority of users of the service will be slightly more inconvenienced by potentially having to drive further to the Tovil tip.)