Suffererof1crankymofo

 

@ Space - you haven't quite sussed it yet, have you?  What gets sent for recycling to recycling plants doesn't all get recycled.

Very good How much do you think would get recycled if we sent nothing to a recycling plant?

 

Define recycling.

See Ghostie's comments - more gets 'recycled' now because we burn it to produce heat!

What will be shipped away to Wales won't all get recycled.  Labels on bottles?  Not all recycled.  Bottle lids?  Not recycled.  Mastic tape on cardboard boxes - not recycled.  And so on.

@ Space - you haven't quite sussed it yet, have you?  What gets sent for recycling to recycling plants doesn't all get recycled.

 

 

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to ....... answer questions,....

 

Where is the evidence, preferably in the form of a detailed, comprehensive, accurate, realistic and  believable environmental audit, proving the proposed changes will create a more environmentally beneficial situation than the status quo?

 

 

 

Just had a looks at zero waste Scotlands page under: improving recycling performance>local authorities... "We can work with local authorities to ensure their projects are evaluated and monitored to show their impact."... so it's quite likely that there is no detailed, comprehensive etc. evidence. I didn't see any local authority schemes in the case studies. So perhaps the answer is to be evaluated when up and running.

 

Of course they can 'work' with local authorities - who pays them?  What's their fee or is it all funded by the Scot. Gov. aka tax payers?  The more local authorities the bods employed by Zero Waste Scotland get to use their services, the more they can justify their jobs and tick a box so they get a pad on the head too.  Best factor in their running costs, including travel, when they knock on all the doors in Shetland explaining how the recycling scheme will work too; that's bound to have a carbon footprint, right?

 

 

Right. Impacts and costs can be positive or negative. We don't have all the answers.

 

Yet this grand scheme has been sold to our beloved SIC councillors on the premise that it will cost X pounds and it will save X pounds, and it will save the planet/tick a box.  What was the figure?  Something like £22k or £28k a year in savings IF other councils use our facilities.  Wonder what the contingency sum is, surely they've got one to take into account what the pilot scheme might throw up?  Positive thought:  perhaps there won't be any additional costs.

 

 

I have just been given a good suggestion regarding the bulky uplifts. Although this wasn't what the OP was discussing.

OK it is £30 or £10 for 6 items.

So if people in an area got together and pooled their requirements, say if two of you had 3 items each that would be  £15 or £5 each.

This forum would be the ideal place to organise this from.

So you reckon that your neighbours, assuming you're on speaking terms, will all be purchasing replacement furniture, white goods, etc., and disposing of their old ones at the same time, do you?  If you live in social housing, you can't necessarily whack it in your back garden because the SIC don't like it plus more often than not come a gale and you have a washing machine literally flying around your garden (seen it happen).

 

 

 

Oh dear..

Now where did I say all that?

The suggestion is in answer to how we stop people flytipping and somehow throwing large bulky items into the sea now that the local skips have stopped.

Which by the way was not what the original OP was talking about.

Anyway if for instance folk in Brae managed to hold onto their bulky items until the skip turned up. It is not impossible to imagine that they could hold onto the same items until there were 6 items in the area.

 

So you want folk to discuss with their neighbours when they intend to buy new items so that they can get together to organise the 6 items for collection?  Me thinks the skips were more regular than what you're envisaging is required to work.  Now I could be wrong but given that the skips have been gone a while now, perhaps a Freedom of Information Act application is in order to ascertain just how much dosh has been generated by the bulk collection scheme, how many tonnes/items collected compared to the cost of the skips.  Somehow, I have a feeling that the skips collected more items.

You know what?  It's none of my neighbours' business as to when I intend replacing furniture/white goods.  Besides, at least two of the properties around here have a high turnover of occupants; for example, one such property has had 3 different tenants in under a year.

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to ....... answer questions,....

 

Where is the evidence, preferably in the form of a detailed, comprehensive, accurate, realistic and  believable environmental audit, proving the proposed changes will create a more environmentally beneficial situation than the status quo?

 

 

 

Just had a looks at zero waste Scotlands page under: improving recycling performance>local authorities... "We can work with local authorities to ensure their projects are evaluated and monitored to show their impact."... so it's quite likely that there is no detailed, comprehensive etc. evidence. I didn't see any local authority schemes in the case studies. So perhaps the answer is to be evaluated when up and running.

 

Of course they can 'work' with local authorities - who pays them?  What's their fee or is it all funded by the Scot. Gov. aka tax payers?  The more local authorities the bods employed by Zero Waste Scotland get to use their services, the more they can justify their jobs and tick a box so they get a pad on the head too.  Best factor in their running costs, including travel, when they knock on all the doors in Shetland explaining how the recycling scheme will work too; that's bound to have a carbon footprint, right?

I have just been given a good suggestion regarding the bulky uplifts. Although this wasn't what the OP was discussing.

OK it is £30 or £10 for 6 items.

So if people in an area got together and pooled their requirements, say if two of you had 3 items each that would be  £15 or £5 each.

This forum would be the ideal place to organise this from.

So you reckon that your neighbours, assuming you're on speaking terms, will all be purchasing replacement furniture, white goods, etc., and disposing of their old ones at the same time, do you?  If you live in social housing, you can't necessarily whack it in your back garden because the SIC don't like it plus more often than not come a gale and you have a washing machine literally flying around your garden (seen it happen).

Maybe contacting the SIC would be more fruitful than asking such specific questions here

I did!  See other thread.  Ghostie knows I did.  They just refer to Zero Waste's rhetoric and what's in the reports presented to the councillors.  They don't appear to like it when you point out holes in their arguments.  

Perhaps the council should raise a separate tax to pay for re-cycling rubbish collection etc. That way they could ring fence the amount required to provide skips and collection , so that budget cuts elsewhere wouldn’t be an issue.

That would be illegal unless the law was changed.  There's already several laws dealing with recycling and rubbish, etc.  As I pointed out on the other thread, local authorities have a duty to encourage recycling.  I further pointed out I had asked the SIC to quote the relevant legislation which stated members of the public/households had to comply ... I'm still waiting.  And again, as per the previous thread, the legislation states that rural areas are EXEMPT.  We have recycling.  Except the EU (which we're leaving) dictates that we can't burn X in the incinerator.  So right now, the SIC is following legislation which will probably be going up in a puff of smoke in a few years, buying wood pellets or wotnots for the district heating scheme and yet all this is green?  Oh look, there flies another cuckoo over a nest ... you want to buy into this non-green scheme and believe the hype (you, meaning the OP), good luck to you.  I'm not, because it's not proper recycling but IS a tick box exercise.

The roadsides are covered in rubbish because some people through bottles etc out of their cars windows instead of taking it home like any normal person would.

I am glad that Shetlanders seem to be well hydrated judging by the amount of plastic water/juice bottles I pick up on a daily basis.

Or because the SIC refuses to do what is done in other parts of the UK, namely employ folk to pick up rubbish outside of the toon.  Instead, they try to con people into thinking we should all volunteer for the clean ups.  Be far too sensible for anyone doing community service to be lowered to picking up rubbish.

And before you accuse me of being all doom and gloom/SIC bashing, I do think that folk should pick up their own rubbish/take it home with them/place in suitable receptacle.

 

 

Please, let's use this thread to support the effort, answer questions, support each other -- if you want to post negative responses, please start another thread.

 

What a good idea, ban negative responses. That's very like telling lies and denying the truth, isn't it.

 

The S.I.C used to deliver skips and allow them to be filled with rubbish, be it wood, metal, stone and all the rest. That has been gone for three or four years now and all the rubbish just gets thrown out to sea. That was all caused by the council, what a good idea.

 

Support the lies and garbage if you want, ETLerwick. I prefer honesty.

 

Honesty in the S.I.C means doing nothing productive for the population of Shetland while extracting every single penny from them, but that's a good idea isn't it. Claim the S.I.C is doing a splendid job while denying the truth. A round of applause here, I think. I can't think why but I'll think all the same, yawn.

 

 

Seriously? If people can't be arsed arranging a bulky item pick up or taking their large items to the dump that is hardly the fault of the SIC is it? I honestly don't think all that rubbish that used to go in the skips gets thrown out to sea. there is definately fly tipping going on but the chap that I have seen doing it shouldn't have been using the community council skips anyway.

 

I think the OP was looking for some positivity for a change and not the usual doom and gloom SIC bashing.

 

It is their thread is you don't like it start your own.

 

Perhaps folk "can't be arsed", as you so eloquently put it, is because they don't have the funds to pay for said item to be collected and don't have transport to get to the dump.  

 

I'd like to add that it is an absolutely blindingly excellent idea for the SIC to suggest that people should not be under any risk whatsoever of taking their eye out by using bungie cords, something discouraged by safety experts; after all, it is essential that we keep the local A&E department busy and provide 'material' for the next series of Island Medics, right?

If using a bungie cord is not something that interests you -- or someone you know/ care about, let's find a helpful person/ neighbor/ volunteer who can help secure the bin(s).

 

Would that work for you?

 

No.  The disabled should not have to rely on neighbours.  Besides, we have a communal bin store within which all of the bins will NOT fit.  The SIC have a legal duty to conduct risk assessments.

Perhaps the OP could explain how this is island-proofed in line with the legislation?

I'd like to add that it is an absolutely blindingly excellent idea for the SIC to suggest that people should not be under any risk whatsoever of taking their eye out by using bungie cords, something discouraged by safety experts; after all, it is essential that we keep the local A&E department busy and provide 'material' for the next series of Island Medics, right?

DHL are now sending stuff via their UK Mail division and appear to have sub-contracted to Ian Reid.  What used to take 6-8 days from Germany when DHL sub-contracted to either Northwards or Parcel Force, it's now taking longer.

I can't keep track of who delivers for Yodel but again, same stuff from Germany is taking longer.  Apparently my most recent package has been signed for and has been delivered in Inverness (I'm reliably informed that "Inverness" is what their 'puter has for Shetland).  It's left Aberdeen though, because unlike last time, my parcel has gone from Hatfield to Aberdeen to Inverness.  What I do know is that I haven't got my paws on it yet!

Oh look, mansplaining at its finest. 

@ Whistle and Flute - I'll have a read of the link, thanks!

The reason I remember women and coal mining so well is because our tutor drummed it into us at an Open University lecture.  Suffrage I remember from further studying and attending the Women's Library, going through the personal effects of Emily Davison and also the Pankhursts, fascinating reading.

 

Maybe, but we can choose 364 other days!

 

Women have had a few thousand years of working knee high in dirt, fish guts and muck with no representation or voice, and usually at the wrong end of some form of abuse at work or at home, and normally for little or no pay. In the numerous "total wars" we have had; Wars of Independence, 30 Years War, 100 Years War, Second World War for example, the countless victims of murder, rape and abuse have been women and their children. The fact that women have had more choices of contraception has clearly been a benefit to us blokes not just women! Women are certainly not shy of hard labour, for example they worked in the mines along with their children until men and the unions put a stop to it, this was especially true in the smaller tin mines of Cornwall. In short. Women are brilliant and more than deserve their day, and have also more than earned their right to representation and respect.

 

On this historic day, spare a thought for the men in society. It will be them driving the cesspit emptying trucks, sweeping your streets, emptying your bins, dying in the front line of wars, doing the dangerous jobs. If there is a death in UK industry, there's a 95% chance it will be a man. Men will spend less years in retirement, men die earlier. They are more likely to lose their kids in custody battles, will be imprisoned for crimes that a woman will not receive a custodial sentence for, will have fewer choices of contraception, and will end up bearing the financial responsibilities long after a marriage has dissolved, even when the blame is not their's. Men will be unsupported in violence in the home, seen as weak if they are ill, and generally get the crap end of life's stick.

 

To all the dads, uncles, sons, grandfathers and brothers out there, remember equality works both ways.

 

And when you raise points like this as a man you risk and interview with your employer, even when you wrote it outside work on your own computer!

 

It was actually a Lord who objected to women working bare-breasted alongside men, and was also concerned about the number of the deaths of children down the mines.  Queen Victoria ordered an enquiry; the upshot being legislation introduced prohibiting women from working down the pits and boys under 10.  Women and children had been paid less than the men, and whilst the powers that be deemed that women shouldn't be half-naked and should be at home as such behaviour was unbecoming for 'young ladies' yet to be married (despite the fact some were already married!) and should be at home tied to the kitchen sink, history (as opposed to herstory) reports that the male miners were happy because they then had more clout in wage negotiations.  It was quite common up until this point for women to be the main breadwinners of families and not men.

I demand to know who is short-sighted and who is long-sighted!  All drivers should have this displayed on their number plates so that other drivers know!  Perish the thought too that someone viewed a number plate from a side mirror and not the rear-view mirror - or anyone having a mirror (like on some motorbikes) that display words to the effect of 'Vehicles may appear closer/larger than they actually are'.

Tongue in cheek but no doubt for even daring to voice an opinion I'll be accused of being a bully but hey, if I stamp my feet, have a hissy fit, flick my hair and do a flounce for all of 24 hours, does that mean I can scream at the top of my voice everyone is a crap driver but meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
 

Living Lerwick claims to be an independent organization with no connection to SIC.

 

Now, why are the SIC issuing the levy bills? why were SIC giving them £10,000 per year plus a office? why is the SIC so keen on backing them?

 

Wonder where the LL managers yearly wage comes from? the SIC? or out of the shops levy payments?

Living Lerwick has an operating agreement with the SIC.  The SIC are responsible for issuing the levy bills in accordance with that agreement.

I'd be going through every single blooming bit of legislation pertaining to BIDs because they surely must have a conflict of interest and I'd be contacting the ombudsman.  As for Living Lerwick new managers wanting to start from scratch, perhaps all those not in favour could let them know that they didn't recognise their authority/status and give them the total cold shoulder and refer them to your Landlord; after all, they can pay the subs, doesn't have to be the Tenants by the looks of it ... although I could obviously be wrong.  I mean, the Scotland BIDs website makes reference to consulting with businesses to form a BID; how can they enforce (extortion?) you paying into a club you don't want to be a member of when you've never been consulted if a new business moving into a BID area?  The answer ...

... empty shops, doing exactly the opposite of what a BID is meant to do.  It is a deterrent to some businesses; why move into an area where you have to pay an additional levy when up the road you don't and get better footfall?

EDIT:

Not everyone can move out of the street but if businesses can afford to move, just how many empty properties (and therefore no rent payable to the landlords) does it take before the landlords get peeved off?  So what if they do threaten to take you to Court?  Is having the bailiffs in your shop the image that Living Lerwick wish to portray?  Just make sure there's the telly cameras and press present when they turn up.

Living Lerwick = final nail in the coffin for the street.

Absolutely hitting the nail on the head!

 

 

 

Imagine you're organising a stag do. You're the best man and you're all flying to Amsterdam. The groom is a pretty popular guy, but he's only wanting 22 pals to come away with him (for whatever reason). One of the boys drops out so your wife suggests one of her female pals that would like to come along. Does saying 'no' to that idea make you a backward, sexist, misogynistic dinosaur?

 

You can attach all the tradition and gravitas you want to Up Helly Aa, but for most of us it's a p1ss-up comparable to the scenario above, where the best craic is on the bus where you spend most of the night singing, drinking, making crude jokes and talking sh1te. While I know for a fact that there are many women that excel in this pursuit as much as men, I suspect most of us would rather just keep it as it is.

 

To conflate the dynamics of this boozy party with the Equal Pay for Women issue, or even the vile treatment of women by abusive, powerful men from Westminister to Hollywood is disingenuous and ridiculous. In doing so we cast both male and female participants in this fantastic festival as complicit villains or meek, subservient spectators of sex discrimination.

There are more men wanting to go out in squads than there are places. There are more lasses wanting to go to halls than there are tickets. A few shrill letters to the Shetland times have not diminished their enthusiasm for the festival. Be 'offended' all you want, but come next Tuesday men and women will be dancing the night away and not giving a flying... torch.

So then, what about transgenders?  Or those who identify as gender fluid?  Can they be Lerwick UHA guizers regardless of whether they are CIS-gender females but now identify as FtM or gender fluid or Gender X (Gender X now accepted in more than one country as opposed to F or M)?

Careful now with the equal pay scenario - just when did any large employer last consult with its workforce regarding having the following day off work especially if it's a 'private party' folk have attended?  See, there just might be some folk who object to the whole isles being subjected to post offices closures, etc.; how does that pan out?  Is that at extra day's holiday in addition to other annual leave or is it a day forced upon employees?  Either way, the country UHAs don't result in mass closures of establishments for 'private parties'.

Sorry Ghostrider. It takes 4 hours to put the protective, wooden flooring down and 4 hours to take it back up again so both parties can't use it on the same day.

Based on how many employees?

The SNP are doing everything that they can to end the problem of homelessness - while the Tories are creating it.

That's simply not true, George.  Go have a read at some of the god awful legislation created by Scot.Gov.  The whole Scottish Court system is shambolic.  So say you're facing eviction and you want to represent yourself.  Now it should be a relatively straightforward matter of finding the relevant form, completing it and submitting it to the Court.  And if you live with someone facing eviction, Scot.Gov. states that you have the right to be heard in court - except the ill-drafted legislation does not state HOW.  Then add into the mix a few court clerks who appear to forget that they are civil servants and woe betide them if you ask for a copy of anything.

You want to go some way to solve the problem of homelessness then you need to also address the unfairness of the current legal system whereby it is left to the body bringing the action against you to keep you up-to-date as to the latest hearings at the local court as opposed to the court also sending you copies of correspondence.  The balance doesn't, contrary to popular belief, necessarily go in favour of the tenant.

IF the SNP were truly addressing homelessness, then they would take a look at their legislation, not all dictated from Westminster, and whack that in order instead of creating more quangoes who will recommend the sun continues to shine out of their backsides.

I was always under the impression that your statement was written as you talked, you read it, and signed it as a true copy of what you had said, any and every alteration must be initialled by you. Not quite sure how that can be tampered with.

You can do a subject data request.  It's not just statements that get relied upon, it's the officers' note books too.  I've worked for both the BTP (in a CJU) and also for a firm of solicitors specialising in complaints against the police and prison service; the poll tax riots involved several cases of police misconduct.  Taped interviews result in the tapes being copied in a certain way, yet I've seen tapes labelled incorrectly, lost, etc.  There's good cops and bad cops, but with procedures also not being adhered to or misconstrued and it's the old occasional bad apple giving a bad impression of the rest.

http://ukwin.org.uk/map/

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/uk-incinerator-plans-theyre-just-rubbish-8527830.html

There is not enough places in the UK to process the non recyclable waste , that's why they ship it to Europe for disposal.

 

Do you not think Europe already has their own non-recyclable waste to deal with without the UKs ?

 

And there is a huge amount of waste available in fact too much for the processors to cope with, that's why they can and will ship it here and pay for it too be processed which covers the haulage and handling costs.  Forget contracts, because your making assumptions with a lack of knowledge on the subject.

Do you not think other local authorities might be planning on having their own recyclable plants/incinerators too?

Do you not think that once out of the EU, there are other recyclable plants/incinerators elsewhere in the world organisations can use?

Do you not think that dependent upon the terms of our exit from the EU, that waste might still be shipped to Europe and that even if Shetland's package were deemed to be cheaper, that those in Europe wouldn't drop their prices to make them more attractive?

Competition, yanno, global markets.

And when we leave the EU and if there are changes in the law, there is no guarantee that in even five years' time the equivalent to the EU Directive will even exist, meaning we might still be able to use our existing methods.