Paying twice to recycle

2
1559

Dear Sirs,
Rye used to have a small recycling site which proved popular with local residents and was a useful and convenient community asset – so useful and convenient, in fact, that it was frequently overfull. Rother District Council recognised this and, true to form, rather than go to the trouble of perhaps finding a more suitable site compatible with demand, decided to close it completely.

Would this have happened if it was in Bexhill rather than Rye? Of course not, a proper solution would have been found. As it is, Rye has been left with the nearest recycling centre being at New Romney, which, although some miles away, has at least had the advantage of being able to take anything without the danger of running out of space. However, we are now told that Kent County Council intend to charge for anyone crossing the border from Sussex who wants to use it from April 1. Presumably, all arrivals will have to come with proof of address.

The KCC argument appears to be that because Sussex residents do not contribute, through their council tax, towards the cost of the site, then it is reasonable to ask them to pay when they use it.

However, we DO pay to use the disposal and recycling facilities that we used to have in Rye and which are no longer available. Instead, it is now necessary to travel to the Mountfield site on the far side of Battle – a round trip of about 26 miles.

Rother has admitted that they are aware of the dearth of waste sites at this end of the county but it seems, neither they nor ESCC have plans to do anything about it.

Once again Rye and the surrounding villages are regarded as convenient sources of money, but when it comes to spending any of that on much-needed local conveniences – clean public toilets come to mind, to say nothing of Rye’s swimming pool – we might as well be asking for the moon. Even our own representatives at Rother seem unwilling or incapable of doing their job and standing up for Rye.

Previous articleAll cisterns go?
Next articleLandgate bollards

2 COMMENTS

  1. I can reveal that from 1 April Sussex residents will have to pay £10 to visit the New Romney recycling centre. In effect, it means that nobody from Rye will use the New Romney dump, which is a much bigger facility and far easier to use than Mountfield, where people sometimes have to climb up to the bins rather than having them on an accessible level, as at NR. The two sites are almost exactly the same distance from Rye, but NR is faster to reach. In my view, 13 miles is too far to travel to a dump. It encourages fly-tipping and rubbish burning. Rother DC or ESCC URGENTLY need to create a household waste recycling site close to Rye. A site in the industrial part of Rye Harbour Road would surely be available, especially if it’s only as small as the current Mountfield facility, which is tiny. Personally, I’d close Mountfield and open a new facility near Rye, which would mean a minimal or no cost impact.

  2. In my newsletter this morning is advice that Rother are closing more of their smaller recycling centres. The reason is always that the sites have become overloaded, as was reported in these columns last December when the same fate befell the Rye facility. It seems that when this happens Rother bury their head in the sand and think that by simply withdrawing a facility that is oversubscribed, then the problem will go away. It won’t, it will get worse.

    https://www.rother.gov.uk/rubbish-and-recycling/recycling-points/

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here