This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel Policing of Beaches and Parks Sub-Panel
FRIDAY, 3rd DECEMBER 2010
Panel:
Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour (Chairman) Deputy D.J. De Sousa of St. Helier
Witnesses:
Mr. R. Mackenzie (Town Centre Manager) Mr. T. Andrews (Stop the Drop)
Also present:
Ms. E. Liddiard (Scrutiny Officer)
[10:34]
Deputy J.M. Maçon of St. Saviour (Chairman):
Hello, and welcome to this sub-panel of the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel that is specifically looking at the policing of parks and beaches, which has specific focus on littering and antisocial behaviour. It should have been included in your packs, but just to check that you have read the statement on the laminated sheet before you, which informs you of your rights, when you appear before Scrutiny. It basically says as long as you do not tell us anything that you know to be untrue you are protected by privilege. I would also like to give the apologies for Deputy Tadier who cannot be here today because he is ill and Constable Crowcroft because he has other engagements. Because Scrutiny hearings do get transcribed, to aid those who transcribe us I will introduce myself and ask you to introduce yourselves. I am the chairman of the sub-panel, Deputy Jeremy Maçon of St. Saviour .
Deputy D.J. De Sousa of St. Helier :
I am Deputy Debbie De Sousa, St. Helier .
Stop the Drop:
Tony Andrews , I am a Stop the Drop group member.
Town Centre Manager:
Richard Mackenzie, Stop the Drop group member.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
We have our Scrutiny Officer, Liz Liddiard and Linda on the recording. Also welcome to members of the public. First of all, may I thank Stop the Drop for their submission to us. It made very interesting reading. However, I believe that in this hearing it is probably better for you to take the lead because I think there are things you want to present to us and if we are able to follow that with questions, if you are happy to follow that procedure, that is what we can do.
Town Centre Manager: Would you like us to start?
Deputy J.M. Maçon: Please.
Town Centre Manager:
Thank you very much for seeing us, we are very grateful for the opportunity to speak to the Scrutiny Panel. Unfortunately, as it says in the Bible: "Many were called but few were chosen." A lot of our group are not here today. Margaret sends her apologies. She has unfortunately had to go back into hospital. Christopher Scholefield has got a family bereavement which he has had to deal with. So you have just got the 2 of us. Stop the Drop, I think I do not really need to explain too much, especially with Debbie, that it is basically a group that was founded about 2 and a half years ago to look at ways that we can reduce the littering and spoiling of the Island. That has been going on. We have prepared for this meeting and we split the responsibilities 4 ways, which has now
gone down to 2 ways, and basically on to my colleague on my right-hand side. What I would like to talk to you about is reverse spending, something that some of you will be very aware of and it is something that I feel quite strongly about. I think, to be perfectly honest, reverse spending is a concept of returning containers for deposits and has been adopted in many, many countries. I have given you some examples: Croatia, which is very good; Barbados, and I have picked out Barbados because I thought it is an island and it is the same sort of concept that we have, and we have the same sort of problems with regard to transportation. In fact, it was currently in the first Prime Minister's question time in the U.K. (United Kingdom) the deposit scheme was raised and David Cameron said he was going to be actively looking at it, having been talked to about it by Bill Bryson, who is a great champion of this and he is also chairman of the anti-litter group in the U.K. That is the author, those of you that have read him. In fact, recently, 84 per cent of people in a poll of New York said that they would favour a bottle deposit scheme. So it can be perceived as quite a populist thing to do. The total idea is, in a nutshell, that bottle and drink containers are responsible for probably over 50 per cent of our litter. If it could be controlled you have got an automatic litter reduction in the Island with no cost to the States whatsoever, and
could become an income generator. Now when I was a boy in London, over 50 years ago, it was very common for us to make our money by going collecting Corona bottles. Some of you will remember Corona bottles, and others will not, which were worth 3p. It would pay for your pocket money, et cetera. Bob a job week, for example, people would often given us bottles instead of money and say: "Take these back" and you would get your money. It has already been a very, very popular scheme. In fact, in those days, maybe I am looking at it through rose-coloured glasses, you walk around the streets of London you would not see any empty bottles because we would have all taken them back to the sweet shop to gain our money. The problem was that 2 things occurred: the average corner sweet shop disappeared in the wake of the supermarket. Premier Supermarket was the first supermarket to open in 1960 probably taken over by places like Tescos, et cetera. Obviously, there was no space for people to return the bottles. Then we also got the introduction of the dreaded P.E.T. (Polyethylene Terephalate) bottle, which did not have the intrinsic value of a glass bottle. Basically the glass deposit bottle very quickly moved out. Even the doorstep milk bottle disappeared. But, there is no reason why this could not be totally over-rode by using new technology. The method of technology, and I think you have got pictures of those, is quite simply to use automation. These machines are in common use in many countries. In fact, if I was to tell you that it is acceptable now, as it is to us, to stop using plastic carrier bags. If I had told you 5 years ago you will not get a plastic carrier bag in a shop you would probably go: "Ooh, that is not going to happen." We now are very happy to not use a plastic carrier bag. In fact, I as a dyed in the wool Scotsman will do anything to avoid paying for a plastic carrier bag. Basically what we are talking about is using technology to overcome the current intrinsic problems. So the big gains of this is that number one, the retailer should gain a return customer because these machines give you a voucher. So when you put your bottles in you get a voucher and it could be for the Co-op, it could be for wherever. Sorry, I should not use brand names probably, for whatever retailer, that you could re-use in that retailer. That retailer would be very pleased to see you because he is getting a return customer. Retailing is all about footfall and getting people back in. By these machines, they are not placed inside, and you can see that one is quite a small shop and he has still got it. They are not placed inside a shop, not taking valuable retail space. That is a great thing to do for 2 things. Number one, they are not losing their retail space. Number 2, the collector, which is probably
where Tony's department come in, does not have to go inside a shop, they purely and simple collate it. In fact some of these machines are so sophisticated it will swallow your bottle, churn it up into small pieces so that it is very usable and far more space efficient for collection. Because when you think about it a bottle is basically air. If you churn it up you have lost all that air and it takes a lot less space. So therefore you have that spare. That is a great advantage, and something, as I say, that in Switzerland they are totally used to doing. The other advantage is you are probably gaining about 1,000 new bottle collectors on the Island for free because I perceive that everybody under a certain age would be very happy to collect the bottles. They could use them, as I say, for bob a job and other things like that, or just purely and simply for personal gain. There is probably 2 effective ways to enforce this. What I would say to you is that there is one I think that we should do but which might be harder to push, and that would be to tax every single container that comes in. So there would be a premium on every single container. This would be very much like an import tax, et cetera. You would say: "This will cost you 3p." That will be passed on to the retailer who would then return it to the people that would do the right thing with their container. I know that initially this might not been seen: "Oh, it is an invisible tax" but it is money that would be gained by it for people to act responsibly. I feel that is far more of an even handed scheme than if we ask people to do it voluntarily. I have been to retailers and some of them hate the thought. Absolutely hate the thought because they perceive there would be more administration for them. However, if they are taxed on the wholesale import, there is very little effort for them, if the vouchers were proceeded and they did not have to deal with it there would not be any extra work. But it would mean that everybody was playing from the same playing field. If, for example, a small retailer did not want to participate they would still have to pay for that. That is one way. The other way of course you could do is say: "Well, look, would you like to do it as agreed initiative?" but I do not think that would be as effective for the whole Island. The cost of the dispensers I have reviewed and I have written to the U.K. The dispenser could be as small as £5,000, which I do not believe is a great amount. I believe that the £5,000 should be sourced from the initial income from the bottle levy. If this was then carried out there are 2 things about deposit schemes, you know that probably you will not get 10 per cent of the effect of it, so of your bottle levy 10 per cent of that will be going into a fund to support and maintain the machines. The other advantage that you have got with this is that the money will be sat
[10:45]
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Yes, maybe that would be the better way to do it. I jotted down a few points, I am sure Debbie has as well.
Town Centre Manager:
One of the pennies I missed out was the legislation in Barbados, which you should have, and you will notice that that has been introduced since, I think, 1986. So they were quite well ahead of us on that one, and it gives you an idea of the sort of deposit there is. So yes, please fire away.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Just to clarify one thing. Is it mainly aimed at plastic bottles or is it for glass bottles as well?
Town Centre Manager:
I would like to think that eventually we should do everything. My perception is it could probably be easier to tackle the plastic bottles first of all, but if we were to be really bullish, let us do the whole lot. I think it is the determination on how you want to do it. You could also include aluminium tins as well. So you can pick up every single container. If it was up to me, because I am a bit of a zealot on the whole thing, I would pick up every drink container.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
You touched briefly on the discussions that you have had with retailers and you commented how you, in general, got quite a negative feedback from them. Could you just expand on that please?
Town Centre Manager:
Yes, I think the perception of a retailer is that number one, space is king, and they were very worried about where this space would come. Number 2, staffing is their biggest overall cost and I think they were worried that it would cause a real sort of staffing level, they would be having someone to deal with the machine, et cetera. I think if that was taken out from their whole remit and all they were getting was a repeat customer, I think that would be better. But at the time I had not gone into the whole thing. I mentioned it to one retailer and he said: "Do not even talk to me about it, Richard. I do not want to talk about." I think that is why we would need legislation to force it through. I think if it was a fait accompli they would deal with it, and probably eventually embrace it because it would bring them their customer back.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Talking on that, the scheme depends on vouchers coming back, who in general restocks them, resupplies these vouchers and things like that?
Town Centre Manager:
I believe we should put this out because I believe it could be part of the income we get from the actual overall tax, and it could either be done by the States, if we want to perceive it as that, or we could put it out to private enterprise and get someone to use that. I think the administration should not be highly expensive. There are 2 things: you would have to replace the stickers and you would have to collect the bottles and the containers. Basically that is not a big problem because it is something we do anyway, so the collection could be picked up by whoever is responsible for the collection of those, and Tony would be able to explain to me more about that. But they would pick up that. Then all you would need is a typical administration ticket, which is very much the sort of job that people do in car parks and things like that. So whether you would pick up,
say, and maybe use whoever administers the car parks and say: "Look, can you pick up these things as well" my suggestion is that we should have at least one per Parish and maybe 2 in the major Parishes. So you are probably talking in all something about 18 to 24, which is not a huge operation but enough to probably keep one person very busy for a week.
Deputy J.M. Maçon: Thank you. Debbie?
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
You said that this represents about 50 per cent of the litter, and you said that you would like it to be plastic and bottles as well. At the moment we have a lot of bottle banks around the Island, and I do my bit and I know quite a few people do because you go to them and they are often full. Would you perceive that if this was implemented it would do away with the bottle banks?
Town Centre Manager:
I think they should work in tandem. I think all you have got to do is make a decision as to how we want to do it. Now it could well be that we do not want to tax glass bottles, but I think the bottle bank
should be adjacent to the other one because I think that would give you a one trip, and I think it has then got to be a decision of someone in a far more senior position than myself to decide how they will want to implement it. But I think what you would eventually become you would have the bottle area, and these would be available in a large supermarket car parks, in the car park of a Parish or something like that, so people could drive, do it fairly easily and it would be an automatic ... your trip of the day. So that is how I see it. I think the aluminium tins will be quite an easy one to incorporate as well.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
I lived in Australia in the 1960s to the 1970s and they used to do bottle deposits everywhere then. So we are way behind on this. You mentioned that one of the ways to fund it could be by putting a tax on every container, so then would you envisage that Harbours would police that?
Town Centre Manager:
Yes, I would think it would be very much ... I am a great person for simplification. They police all the import duties as it is, I think it should be quite simply: "This is a bottle." Fine. You will then incur
this sort of tax which you could put on and then your customer would reclaim the tax. It is a very easy reclaimable tax for those that are conscientious. If you do not then you pay the premium, and that premium should go towards administering schemes like this.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
You mentioned in the beginning all food containers, and a big issue in St. Helier , in particular, as we all know, is the takeaway cartons. So would you incorporate that into it as well because these are more polystyrene at the moment?
Town Centre Manager:
No. I tell you what I would do though, I would ban those if we could, because to be perfectly honest if McDonalds, who are the biggest retailer of takeaway food, do not use polystyrene why does anybody else? I would just say these are unacceptable on our Island. I would have something that would break down. So, no I would not include them, but I have just diverted slightly off, so accept my apologies, but that would be my policy. I just would not allow them.
I do believe as well that McDonalds are involved with Stop the Drop as well, are they not?
Town Centre Manager:
They are indeed, and they participate quite freely.
Stop the Drop:
There was an early morning trip into town, as some of the Deputies of St. Helier joined in, and the polystyrene tray was a huge part of that debris that was left throughout the whole of the Weighbridge area, up into the square and throughout the pedestrian areas of the town. So it is better to stop that being used all together. It does not break down, it goes into all the car parks across the Island. People pop into the chippy up the South Hill and the headlands and a high proportion of that litter is emanating from the town area.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
I think it is a really good idea about tourism, if we were to adopt this, using this as a way to promote Jersey as being different because we are so far behind with other things, it would be good. I think it also gives a concept of a clean and tidy Island, you just put it: "By the way, Jersey is part of a bottle deposit scheme" and you think: "Oh wow, great." Let us get in before the U.K., that is what I say.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa: Yes, absolutely.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
If we could move on to the next section.
Stop the Drop:
So I will deal with litter. I have got a few facts and figures which I will run through. It is widely known and believed that litter is on the increase and the U.K. Highway Agency facts and figures document for 2008 states that since 1962 there has been a 500 per cent increase in litter, we assume that this is including the countryside, and Jersey also faces these challenges, in addition to this probably the drive-by litter as well because the vehicles are more easily accessible these days. Everybody owns one and the amount of
litter that comes out of vehicles is quite noticeable. Litter in the U.K. and evidently over here on beaches in recent years has also been a huge increase. It is very noticeable after taking part in litter cleans and we did one at First Tower. We were hoping to do First Tower to Bel Royal. We did not leave the First Tower district, this was a community group out there. We spent our whole time on that bit of beach below the First Tower kiosk area and there were about 15 of us up to 3 hours just cleaning one small area. There were thousands of cigarette butts and other bits of polystyrene and plastic, things that we would not have found in the past, and they are there for many, many years. Also on top of that we have to deal with the deliberate issues with cigarette butts, which are not really perceived to be litter by a good percentage of people, they feel it is just another item which is dropped on the floor. There is a perception that it does not really matter because the area is going to be cleaned anyway at some stage. Others are just not aware of it. The big issue for us here is the policing issue with the cigarettes. They have tried all sorts of things in the U.K. Over here we have increased the workforce to deal with the cigarette but since the inception of the No Smoking Policy we have introduced an afternoon cleaning team in St. Helier . Half of their day is dealt with picking up cigarette litter. It is not something that
disappears in the evening, it is there for the next morning, it appears outside every restaurant, pub, cafés, nightclubs, businesses all over town. I have had a few calls in about the areas around the back of the Esplanade, the new office blocks that have gone up. Everyday, throughout the whole day, staff come downstairs, they have a no smoking policy, they go out on to the pavement and they drop their litter. Many areas have tried cigarette holders on the buildings and you go round the Weighbridge from here, most of them have got no fronts or no signs, they are either kicked off or removed. When they do get used they do not get emptied. We feel that the area around the town centre, even at night, even though it is well policed, and there is an abundance of police officers late at night, policing litter is a very low priority with the other offences that are going on at night. We do not see any evidence of policing and the publicity side, so when the press and others report crimes, and there is a fine, everybody knows about it. With cigarettes, litter or any other type of litter, we do not find a record of anybody ever being prosecuted. There is a perceived issue with the policing agencies that it is very costly to progress a litter charge, it can take up to 3 hours of paperwork, and that is at the Parish Hall . If that goes on to Magistrates Court, as well as requiring witnesses and others, it is recognised by those authorities that it is probably too costly to do all that work to get a £10 fine, even though we know the limitations are far greater than that. Honorary officers can fine up to £200. But those officers we have spoken to openly admit that a first offender would never get anywhere near that. In real terms, nobody does get fined for it. So one of the big issues we have identified that we feel can confront this issue is the instant fine. As people go out, on the spot fines. In other areas it does work. There is a standard fine in Arun, I think it is, which is, I think £80. If you admit the offence and you pay that in a short period of time it is reduced to £50. If you want to argue your case, and you go to court and you are found guilty, that can be scaled up to £1,000. It is only a deterrent, they just publicise so that people can see, as well as publicity and education. It starts from programmes in schools, primary right through junior schools and into senior schools, and behaviours that go on, on campus, at further education. This concern with cigarette litter is people believe they have got a little butt which is a cotton type material that will break down. It is not. It is a plastic polymer type of material. Cigarette butts, it is argued, there are huge issues about this, but manufacturers believe they break down in one to 2 months. Others believe it takes 12 months to break down in fresh water,
salt water takes longer, 2 to 6 months. There are others that believe they take up to 500 years to break down. But you can see them on all the beaches, everywhere you go there are cigarette butts. In St. Helier we found that 4 staff are now during the morning spending at least 3 to 4 hours each picking up litter, which is cigarette related. We are having to speed the process up, because they are getting in the gutters, in the channels, by having to invest in 2 bits of machinery, which are basically vacuums for the precinct areas and are battery run. They are going to cost us £15,000 each. This is just to deal with the effects of the cigarette litter and the knock-on effect we have got on every bit of street furniture, around the base of every bin, everywhere you go, it is cigarette butts. It is an ongoing programme. You cannot clean an area once a day and leave it, as we know. People are coming from the Island throughout the whole of Europe, including the U.K., from cities and wherever else, have different habits and the education clearly needs to be spread out to those areas as well, so the consuls could be involved and others in that line. The Encams, which are an environmental charity which came from the Britain Tidy Group in 2009, have got a lot of information. They claim it does take 500 years for a butt to break down. Smoking related issues, we know there are 4,000 chemicals identified in a cigarette butt. They are carcinogenic. They are mutagenic. There are toxic chemicals in there. Within an hour of a butt being dropped in water those chemicals are being released into our streams, into our waterways, into our beaches, so it does have a knock-on effect.
[11:00]
Wildlife is affected. There are identified various wildlife that will eat these things believing they are food and take them in and ingest them. Cigarettes are one issue. I would like to move on to chewing gum, another area of concern which we recognise as a bit of a filthy habit really. Not only do you spread it through all the shops, you take it home on your shoes and your cars and everything. We are spending an exorbitant amount of time and money cleaning chewing gum. It can take between 10p and 60p to remove an item of chewing gum from the street. The difference in that costing is really to the amount of frequency you clean that street. If you go on the internet you will see there are a lot of quotes. The Mayor of London say's between 50p and £2 per piece of gum. That is related to, if you are doing a deep clean, once a year, and it is going to cost a lot more. It takes a lot more work to
get rid of it. If you're doing far more passes throughout the year the hit each time is cheaper but you are doing it far more frequently. It does end up as a very expensive project and they do say if you go to London, the shopping streets, the main precincts, can take up to 3 months to do a deep clean. That is a huge area. There are no qualms it seems with anybody dropping cigarette and chewing gum litter. The gum is just dropped. It is a big issue, they stick on benches, on walls, everywhere. No deterrent whatsoever for chewing gum. It can be children, adults, anybody anywhere seems to be quite happy dropping a bit of chewing gum. Again, it is the education. They do not realise that the amount of money that is spent, at the moment ... we are looking at having to buy another piece of equipment to deal with chewing gum cleaning of the streets. I priced this up and we have one vehicle out there already. A second vehicle is going to cost me, a tow-behind trailor, probably about £18,000. If it is a mountable piece of kit that goes on the back of the vehicle, which is what we already have, is £28,000. As well as the running of this, using the fuel, and a vehicle to carry it, we are talking about an awful lot of funding, and the staffing of it again. It seems to me unless we tackle these issues they are going to go on and on and on, and the amount of debris we are dealing with daily will for ever increase. We really do feel that there are other issues that are also affecting the way that people perceive it. The drinking issue in areas throughout the town during the day and during the night. People in our public areas in the parks, car parks, alcohol consumption is a litter issue but is also perceived as a threat to the general public as well. In areas, Eastleigh is a good example, they have introduced no go zones for alcohol and they have registered this by not only naming the locations but on a map reference as well. So it is a district that can be designated as a no drinking, no alcohol zone. It successfully worked over here for the car parks and that was an addition of a piece of legislation which banned alcohol in car parks. This is something that could be looked at in the parks legislation. One of the concerns we have at the moment, we have a policing of parks, Parade Gardens I will use as an example, it required somebody to witness somebody causing a nuisance when they are under the influence of alcohol. That person has got to report it and they have got to be prepared to become a witness in court. Not very many people will do that. We can move the individuals off that particular site. They go and stand on the pavements around the area, or sit on the benches, which come under the policing the roads regulation. So it is another piece of legislation. Legislation to cover a district area where there is a complete park or a whole
go forward prosecuting because of the cost involved in presenting the whole case and getting to the magistrates. It is too much for the amount of fine and they do seem to be more supportive of an on the spot fine. They would be willing to do that, paperwork is a lot less. As far as parking offences go, there seemed to be fixed penalties for parking offences and this could be the same type of legislation and give a fixed penalty. I think we would benefit the rewards. Education is one thing, policing and going round spotting people doing these offences is another issue, but unless there is the on the spot fine that they know they will receive, no two ways about it, I think that is the way to go because at the moment we have all the legislation and litter is continuously increasing. It is absolutely worthless. It is a big issue for us at the moment.
Town Centre Manager:
It could in fact be policed by our traffic wardens. If you think we have those. You could go one step further and introduce barriers into your car parks you could then bring your traffic wardens out to police the litter problems, which is just an aside.
Are there any questions that you would like to ask on any of those points?
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
You touched on the cost of policing this. The brunt of the costs of policing this in St. Helier , which has the most number of parks, plus the beach, is there an exact cost of what it costs the Parish to clean up litter and gum?
Stop the Drop:
It costs the States of Jersey £1.3 million a year for the cleaning, but you have got to bear in mind those figures are not broken down to individual items that may well include bin emptying and mechanical sweeping of other areas that may or may not be filthy. That is the overall parks figure. I suppose St. Helier is probably spending around £700,000. I would not quote that as an accurate figure, but that is the estimate off the top of my head. I know that we have 4 staff during the morning that will spend 3 to 4 hours of their duty just doing cigarette litter alone and the afternoon teams are in addition, which I will come on to deal with. We have 4 staff now doing a second shift just to confront the litter in the afternoons, and you can go out during late evening and you will
still see litter. It is a 24-hour event in St. Helier . It is probably across the Island because a lot of the litter is mobile. People go out and have a drink, even just a can of coke, wherever they pulled up, and across the Island the population of youngsters are very mobile and any park area, green area, they will turn up in a car park, wherever it is, and the litter will be left where they are.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
I agree with you that Education is where it begins and we will be speaking to the Minister for Education at some stage. I know at Stop the Drop you did a campaign with Haute Vallée on chewing gum and you said to me that you were amazed about how much those students learned, and they were coming up and they were just off the top of their head giving really big figures that they had found out and it really made them aware. So education is definitely a way we need to go.
Stop the Drop:
It needs to be supported with more than just education. The deterrent has to be there. I recently walked through Haute Vallée school and the amount of chewing gum in their play areas and right through outside of all the buildings I was quite staggered, and
that is only a year after the campaign. So it is easily lost and easily forgotten about. It needs a prolonged attempt to publicise and keep that in the forefront, as well as having that deterrent. The deterrent has got to be acted upon. It needs one or 2 cases to get it publicised, if it is not acted upon then we have legislation which is absolutely useless now. It is difficult to enforce. There is a huge cost to it. By having an on the spot fine that people know about it is out there, easily publicised and it is easily dealt with.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
We have already spoken to the Honorary Police, the police and the Minister for Home Affairs and Transport and Technical Services. Obviously they offer their own perspective on these matters. They discussed about beach cleans, your 3-hour beach cleans. T.T.S. (Transport and Technical Services) when they gave their submission to us felt that the beach cleans that they did throughout the year were very good, very effective. They picked up a lot of litter. Just to square that against what you have told us, would you like to comment?
I would. Their service is a fantastic service. I would not knock the service they are doing. But if you have got a couple of chaps walking along a beach, they will pick up what they see on the way across. On a tide line on an average fortnightly cycle there is 7 or 8 lines of weed on the average beaches here. They have got to go across the latest tide mark where possible, 2 Deputies were on the last litter pick-up at First Tower. They witnessed the amount of material, and one of them is helping pick it up. So I would say that what I see and it is substantiated, there is a lot of litter left at every tide, whether it is a small tide or not. I would say if anybody wanted to walk around and see a huge volume of litter on a previous litter pick, there is the Jardins de la Mer site, which you walk over the wall and you look behind the scalloped seated areas, which are there to break the tide, look underneath and you will see probably several tonnes of plastic bottles, cans and whatever which have been there for an awful age. It would be too costly for T.T.S. or anybody to get in and remove this amount of material on a regular basis, because I tried it with a colleague and Mr. Phil Hague of the Parish of St. Helier and we spent probably an hour not moving any area bigger than this room and we filled black bag after black bag of stinking, filthy rubbish from in among those scalloped areas. This was without having to move. Further along you have got the rock wall which goes on to the arm of the harbour. That was littered filthy with material. It is not just what you see walking along the coastal beach. You go into some of the other bays where it is inaccessible. I do a lot of kayaking. I go out in the evenings fishing and you occasionally pull up on the isolated beaches, and I was stunned by the amount of debris - not all from Jersey - just there. St. Brelade 's Bay, you travel out in the evening and you see little fires in the camps at the weekend and the kids are on the beach or on the headlands, parties on the beaches, the litter appears. It is not their fault. T.T.S. are not generating it, they are just one agency trying to cope with it. The volume is too big for them to cope with continuously.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
Can I just jump in there, sorry. I had written out, because I was aware of that anyway, and I have seen the pictures that you took of that. So I was going to ask you about that anyway. We have also got the Minquiers and the Écréhous, and we know that youngsters - it has been in the press - go there, have parties and absolutely wreck the place. Because of the outlying areas how do you envisage that this can be policed, because we have got enough on Island without the outlying rocks?
Stop the Drop:
As people know, there is a penalty to pay, and there is an element of policing, I suppose, the Harbour authorities or whoever else, the Customs and Excise who have areas out on these locations, but that is more of a community policing, which is probably the easiest way to identify it. I should imagine the majority we have got, is what left behind and either gets picked up by those that are using these sites and have huts out there, otherwise it is just waiting for the tide to collect and it will end up back in the Channel on to one of the islands. It is not an easy one to deal with without education, there are only a few ports on the Island, and we are going to need those. We do put notices up over here. I would not like to see notices all over the Écréhous and Les Minquiers but I think those 2 particular areas they need their own piece of help, if you like, and I would see that would be information on maybe one of the huts down there or maybe those taking a voluntary role and advising.
[11:15]
Others are visiting the site and it has worked quite well with the bird population. There is no reason why the same approach for litter as this is probably as big a threat to them as anything else.
Town Centre Manager:
But do you not think the problem is there is no consequence to any action. Because we had a meeting with the Chief of Police and he said, no, he would not prosecute because it would cost him over £500 to generate. Now if there is no consequence to an action how are you going to be fully aware? All right, you can take someone's conscience but some people will not have that and I have to say to you that probably if there has been some alcohol involved the actual social conscience goes out. If there is a consequence to your pocket or ... there is something to deter you from doing these things.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
It is very interesting because we did speak to the Chief of the Honorary Police, Mr. Scaife. We asked him about the whole bureaucracy behind the processing and we did ask him about on the spot fines, and while he was representing the Honorary Service, the opinion came back that the preference was to continue with the Parish Hall system rather than introduce on the spot fines. The argument carried on saying that if you start to move away from the on the spot fines you move away from the Parish system, you move away from the honorary system, and obviously coming from where he was coming from that would not be encouraged. Would you comment on Stop the Drop's relationship with the Honorary Police?
Stop the Drop:
I would say that an officer from St. Brelade gave a complete different view to that and other members of the group were there, where he felt he would be more willing and his officers be more willing to go out there and do the policing, if there as an on the spot fine, as opposed to trawling through the existing legislation. It has got to be recognised, I suppose, a Chef de Police for St. Helier is only one of 12. But I would say if he is happy with the honorary system and policing the legislation as it is, then it has failed abysmally because there is no policing of litter at all, anywhere on the Island. I have not seen a case that I can recall where anybody has ever been prosecuted for litter. I would challenge him quite openly, and I have spent many years trying to persuade honorary officers. I have had some out on early morning stints with myself
and colleagues where we walk the streets trying to find dog owners who are allowing their dogs to mess. It is extremely difficult so you have got to witness them delivering. Some of them are willing to come out and do that and I applaud them for that, but I think it is possibly showing how it is not working.
Town Centre Manager:
Can you give an example of the last time you prosecuted someone?
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
We did ask and he was not able to give an example.
Town Centre Manager:
I think that probably says it all, does it not?
Stop the Drop:
He may well have had people they might have warned, but it is the perception of getting that information out into the public arena, you know if you are going to break a speeding fine, you get a fine. If you urinate in a doorway you are not going to walk away with less than £100. But drop litter, you can do what you like. It is very difficult.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
Out of that same hearing came the fact that - and it was not something Mr. Scaife was aware of until he spoke to them because he was coming in - and he found out that some Honorary Police, when they come across the beach party they pick out a couple of people that look responsible, take their names, take their details, and say to them: "We are going to hold you responsible for what happens here." That is happening occasionally. What would need to be done in my view, and I am sure you would back me up on that, is that it would be something that as a whole honorary system would be communicated but when you think ...
Stop the Drop:
That is to be applauded. That is the public spirit that we would love to see more of. I have got a lot of history with the areas like the People's Park where I was at a recent meeting with members of the St. Helier Friends of People's Park a group that have concerns about events. We did discuss that perceived issue of youth issues at night on that park, and they did quote that States officers normally are called and they will turn up, but they will have the blue lights flashing, the park will be full of youngsters with cans and bottles, and they walk away from the drinks or they hide them, and then the police will walk around the park, everything is hunky dory and they will go away. I think the Honorary Police are very close to the situation and they know the situation very well. They are dealing with it everyday, so do the States Police, but again when you have got 40 or 50 youths, we have to pick up the cans and broken glass in the mornings, every morning of the week, without fail; Saturdays, Sundays are a lot worse, as is Monday morning, but the rest of the time it is a nightly event. Obviously something is wrong. I mean it still goes on and in spite of them approaching these individuals, as you say they do on the beaches, it would be great if they can do the same thing at the park areas and around the town areas because we do not see the evidence of that. Nobody is presenting me with black bags full of litter that these youngsters have picked up, unless they are taking it home and I find that hard to believe. On the beaches I know there are euro bins and it is easily got rid of. But in a park environment it does not seem to happen that easily.
Town Centre Manager:
Are we talking about issuing a permit for partying on the beach? Is that an extension, which I think makes a great deal of spend. If you are someone who wants to use a public place all they would need to do, it could even be done with modern technology, you could email, et cetera, or text and say: "I am responsible" and if someone has not logged in their permit they would be obliged to move on. I think that is a very good idea and then if there is rubbish you have got someone who is responsible for that area. Because again it is consequence to an action and if you have not been held for a consequence, I mean I have never heard about it before but I think it is a great idea. I used to work out at the golf course in Gorey and you used to see the consequences of the beach parties which were bottles, et cetera, et cetera. Because the kids did not want to take the bottles home because the parents did not know they were drinking. I mean so there is ... I think if you had to get a permit ... I mean, it is very easy for the Honorary Police to say: "You have not got a permit" gone. But there is another point.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Yes, under the regulations 1959, which has then been updated, it talks about the Minister is required to grant permission for certain activities on beaches and whether it is legislation or perhaps more custom that one is expected to contact the Constable of the Parish in seeking permission to hold, say, a beach party or something. I suppose the difficulty, as was highlighted by the police when they came in, for those people who would seek those permissions and would get those permissions are probably the people who would be responsible and clear up after themselves anyway, whereas the people which we perhaps are focusing on more, the minority obviously perhaps would not engage in those processes and probably would not get a permit.
Town Centre Manager:
Absolutely, but then there would be some sort of reason, rationale, for the people. Because I have seen, as I say, the Grouville guys who are quite good and they go over and patrol, but what ... if there was no permit they would have every right to ask them to remove themselves from the beach because they were participating in illegal activity. I do not believe it should be necessary for the Constable. I do not think we should be too draconian, but I think we do have modern technology where someone could be informed that we will be having a small party, et cetera, and I think if that ... with a contact person, and then there would be a consequence because if that beach was left, you know, in an unacceptable situation you have got a contact person.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
What I am concerned about, as a Town Deputy and a representative of the ratepayer of St. Helier , there is a huge cost involved here for the Parish. That cost is funded through our rates. So therefore if any - and I would like your take on this - fines or licences were involved then I would think that the Parish, to a certain extent, would have a percentage of that into a reserve pot to go back to the Parish to cut down the cost to the ratepayer.
Town Centre Manager:
Absolutely. I mean I believe St. Helier is subsidising the rest of the Island because 50 per cent of the people that are littering in St. Helier are not parishioners, so therefore you are totally correct on that one. That we are subsidising the rest of the Island.
Stop the Drop:
It is the Policing of Roads Regulations 1959, it does state: "The application of fines levied that fines for offences against these regulations which are levied by a Constable of Centenier in exercising of their powers, the Policing of Parks, Sea and Beaches 1957 should be awarded for the benefit of the Parish in which the offence was committed."
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
So it is already in legislation?
Stop the Drop:
On the Policing of Roads. The Policing of Parks I do not think is that specific.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
If I could just touch back on this idea of the legislation, under the Policing of Beaches Regulations 2(1) Prohibited Acts: "No person on any beach shall (b) deposit, throw or leave otherwise than in a receptacle provided for the purpose any bottle, tin container, glass, crockery, paper, wrapper or any refuse of any nature whatsoever." So again what has been communicated to us, and I tend to agree with, is that the legislation is there to the letter of the law but what seems to be coming across again from our public submissions is more the enforcement angle of it, rather than the powers that are necessarily available in order to do it. Do you agree?
I think you are absolutely 100 per cent right.
Stop the Drop:
To a point. I feel that the legislation is there, the summary fines are there, and everything else is there, but we have still had the information come back to us that it is too costly to process the information for a very low fine. That is why a statutory fine on the spot with the reward that if you pay within a certain period it is reduced form £80 to £50 or you want to argue the case and you are still found guilty at the end of it, then it can go up accordingly to whatever the Magistrate feels up to the limit. That has been proven to work very well, and there is evidence in Eastleigh, I have looked at their campaigns, that they are benefiting already the rewards for that particular type of thing, it is on its way up. I say Eastleigh, Eastleigh is the zoning but ...
Town Centre Manager:
But there is also central London as well. They do it in central London, the borough of Kensington which must generate as much rubbish as you do anywhere else. That is exactly the system and
it is down there and legislated. You are absolutely correct. The regulation is there but it is not administrable because of the way it is done and the ongoing costs. I think we do have people there, I mean if you think about it our idea was you would incorporate your fine with a parking fine form, so the person would have one fine. He would not be a parking warden, he would be what they call town ambassadors. They are there to help people and also administer and keep your town clean and accessible.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
To a certain extent we have already thought we have got that sort of person in St. Helier by our Parish warden. Is it not something that they could ...
Stop the Drop:
Do not have powers under the Policing of Roads Regulations. Only on the Policing of Parks, which is another issue, but if I could ... Arun I should have said instead of Eastleigh, as far as the fixed penalty notice area. They say the reason why they are using fixed penalty notices is ... their quote is: "A clean and safe community is a high priority for the Council. By issuing fixed penalty notices for littering and dog fouling we are demonstrating we take the
environmental crimes very seriously and sending out a message of this type that antisocial behaviour will not be tolerated. It is hoped that by working together the quality of our environment will be improved for everybody." That is really what we are saying. That the environment is as important as anything else we are dealing with. We are walking among this rubbish everyday and the present legislation needs enhancing, and I would strongly recommend and agree with the same mind of a fixed penalty notice. It is out there, it is easily publicised. It is the simplest thing to put on the side of a vehicle or a notice, in the press, and it does not take many cases to have the full effect. There are figures in areas where it has been done and they have seen a reduction of 45 per cent and up to 90 per cent in other districts. I have got various bits of paperwork to support that here, which I am quite happy to leave behind if the Deputy so wished.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
I am just conscious of time. I mean I have got more questions, are you okay to stay a little bit longer?
Stop the Drop: Yes.
We have got all morning for you.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Okay then. We had the States Police in with the Minister for Home Affairs and we were discussing the enforcement side of it, which came through on our public submissions very strongly, and the Acting Chief Inspector argued that while they had their 5 top priorities which they have to deal with, and the Minister commented that when you have got a police officer who you have to pay £57,000 a year for, where are you going to put the priorities, where are you going to weigh this, and the argument was because of how it is prioritised the police see antisocial behaviour, dangerous crime, things like that way up the list than littering.
[11:30]
When I did ask the officer how many prosecutions had happened and he said: "Well, from their side nothing." Despite the legislation being there, we know that obviously littering is occurring. Then we did get on to this discussion about perhaps it is more better than if
you are saying the police are here to do, because they have to because of the C.S.R. (comprehensive spending review) and the lack of resources that are happening at this time, possibly extending other people's roles, such as perhaps traffic wardens to make them all do.
Town Centre Manager: Absolutely
Stop the Drop:
I do agree with that.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
It is not more trivial offences but perhaps less of a priority to the police offences.
Stop the Drop:
I would say that a police officer should not be walking past somebody dropping litter.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
To be fair, they did comment and say if they saw someone doing it then obviously they would act, but ...
Stop the Drop:
To me, the morning we went out with the press there were several thousand items and hundreds of polystyrene trays all over the place that were dropped the night before. There was a heavy police presence the night before in that area, just talking to the shop owner ... this is where the publicity comes in, that if everybody rolled in and took an ownership of it this would help the police. A notice, a voluntary code of practice, whatever could be called, in each of these outlets notifying that you do stand to get fined because at the moment everybody knows they can drop a box in front of a police officer, behind a police officer, they say: "Oi, pick that up, put it in a bin" but they will do it again tomorrow because there is no consequence for that action. Littering is not recognised as littering anymore. It is just convenient to drop it wherever you like. You can be alongside a bin it does not make any difference. I think that it should not be encouraged to walk away from it and take a step back, they are there for a reason and policing is what it says, it is policing and these things are costing the Island an horrendous amount of money. There are all sorts of agencies, there are all sorts of volunteer groups. I have had Girl Guides from the U.K. doing litter picks on woodlands, on beaches, Christian groups, doing them. Everybody is doing their bit but it is not helping reduce the amount of litter that is appearing, it is on the increase; so the legislation really, I feel strongly, fixed penalty notice with the support of the police so if they do see somebody that is dropping, take them to the side, have a word with them so be it, but several cases need presenting to go to the courts for the general public, otherwise we will never ever get over this. We cannot for ever pour more resources into it. We mechanise, we buy in more machinery because staffing is an expensive item, and if we carry on the way we are going, we will be doubling in the next 20 years the amount of people required to clean up and beyond that again. It is just too expensive for the Island.
Town Centre Manager:
I do agree. I think my recommendation would be to extend the powers to administer these things. People like Parish officials which can pick up, if you like, our Parish wardens, Honorary Police, so that they can deal with the lower priority, and that people know that there is more people looking about. If I could add also one thing, I think it should be part of a licensee's responsibility for all smoking debris within a certain area is their responsibility to clear up. Because what has happened is with this smoking ban people are now standing outside pubs to smoke. They are 100 per cent their customers. I know, I see them and I see the things go, and half the time who is going to tackle a 6 foot 6 guy that is stood outside a pub saying: "Pick your butt up before I do something with my butt." But that is another story. But I believe it is their responsibility. If we go back to the old-fashioned responsibilities whereby you used to see the shopkeeper cleaning up outside their pavement, I believe that should now become part of their licensing responsibilities. Why should we, as a Parish, pick up all the cigarette butts from outside, which they do. I see our Parish guys at 7.00 a.m. in the morning picking up a row of cigarette butts from outside a pub. So they are cleaning up what the pub used to do because when they had a smoking area that was their responsibility. They have now absolved their responsibilities: "Oh well they are outside my pub" they do not do anything. These are their customers and they should be responsible for it.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
That should be extended as well to al fresco licences as well.
You are 100 per cent right, I have to say.
Stop the Drop:
There are quite a number of licensing opportunities that when people apply for all these items they can easily be written into it. They co-operate and take part and at the end of the day the food on the go outlets if we can get the containers identified simply, or they are not so unfriendly to the environment, but if it is a simple stamping issue, so you know they have all come from Fred Bloggs chip shop, that company at the end of a night, they have traded, they have decided to use that type of material, they have encouraged the littering issue, if you like, they can do a clean up of the general district, simply done with a couple of black bags and a couple of guys walking round. That would certainly get them on board as far as publicising it is an offence and getting co-operation of our customers, and it would be a driver. I am sure that would have huge impact.
Town Centre Manager:
I mean McDonalds have a policy of having a litter patrol. Now I know they are everywhere, but they do have a litter patrol for
outside their area and maybe before we granted a licence for a takeaway they would have to have evidence that they patrol the litter. I mean I am not talking about going miles and miles, but within a reasonable area.
Stop the Drop:
I think it would have a knock-on effect that they would educate their customers.
Town Centre Manager: Absolutely.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
If I can ask then how well do you find at Stop the Drop, how easy is it to communicate with all the other agencies, so that is Education, T.T.S., Honorary Police - you have touched on Honorary Police - or States Police?
Stop the Drop:
It is difficult because you are talking about a group of volunteers that meet. There were 2 Stop the Drop groups having set up their own but it was felt that it was far better and we would get to our
goals much quicker as an Island-wide mandate, so we amalgamated. There is so many fronts to deal with and we have talked about reverse vending, gum, cigarette, general litter, events on beaches, if you like, legislation; it is almost too much for a small group of volunteers to take on in some respects but we have gone ahead and taken it on. But to split yourself down to education in schools, educating the public, takeaways, licensed premises, it goes on and on and on. We get reports back from everybody that has anything to do with litter, if you like, even the pastors that go out at night are logging the amount of glass bottles and glasses out of licensed premises that have walked past the bouncers somehow, people go out and have a cigarette, walk down the road and deposit all these, what they feel, are potential weapons, so they collect them all. There are several thousand that they have collected. So another form of litter. So we do get a lot of feedback, but we cannot enforce anything. This is why we here. We feel that this is a way of maybe getting a message over. We do public events. We have done launches in the Town Hall . We have done all the litter picks and we have done programmes with schools and the rest of it, but there is a limit to how much you can do knowing that next year is going to be exactly the same and no matter how the message is got over there is no deterrent for the
others that are not paying attention, a lot of kids do. The bins get filled up daily. If anything we are emptying Broad Street 3 times a day. So there is a lot of people who do care, but those that do not will never care it seems, unless there is a deterrent.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
I have 2 things I want to put: first of all it has been mentioned many times throughout this morning's hearing that because of the costing implication of doing anything legally about the problem it cannot possibly be done, but we have also had the high cost both to the taxpayer and to the Parish ratepayers for cleaning up this. Surely one outweighs the other and ...
Stop the Drop:
Also the cost to tourism and we have had several instances in the last year where people have visited to the Island, have written to the press, and have commented on the state of our countryside and our beaches. Not very good publicity. That is, if you like, an undisclosed sum that is probably not easily identifiable but people do comment on it, so people do go back with these impressions. How much better to come to our Island that does what it says: we have got clean beaches, we have got wonderful countryside, just
leave your footprint behind. At the moment we are not achieving anything near that and I think that the unknown quantity out there is huge. The impact on people who come here is huge, and we go away and we moan about London and all these other places. We are not far behind it, the rate we are going and the amount of litter that is being produced is for ever increasing, we will be there soon.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
That was the other point I was going to make. My mother-in-law lived here from the late 1960s up until 2006. She came back on holiday 2 years ago and she remarked how filthy the town was. But it was just before the Parish took over the cleaning of inside the ring road.
Stop the Drop:
That was an effort too to try and get more out of resources we had, which we have done, but on top of that we have had to introduce further resources again and will be for ever introducing more and more resources. Street washing does not do enough to keep on top of the job so we have to duplicate and double the amount of effort going into street washing. That is a huge amount of money to put forward and you have got the issue that these things are
diesel guzzling bits of equipment. The volume of water that we use in a week is horrendous to wash just simple things like chewing gum or, admittedly, you can argue that the streets need washing anyway, which they probably do with tyre tracks and whatever else, bird droppings and whatever, but to stand on site and it takes several seconds to move a bit of chewing gum out with this thing blasting hot water at it, a huge resource of material and energy and labour just to remove something that could quite easily be dropped into a bin. Admittedly maybe the joint approach would be to have lots and lots of these little gum bins all over the place. It has worked elsewhere, but it also needs legislation, people need the incentive to do it and the incentive would be: "Well, if I do not do it, I may well get caught."
Town Centre Manager:
The 2 things that we talked about, we have identified the reverse spending and fining, is not going to impose a cost on the States at all. All right there is a legislation cost, and I appreciate that, but when the payback and the comparison, I mean I fully understand the financial situation we are currently in, but I do believe if we were to tackle some of these, we are not talking about anything that is going to incur a cost. In certain cases it will create savings.
If you create savings on your cleaning and you create savings on the collection, and you also run a reverse spending, it will eventually I am certain generate you a small income. We are doing something to improve the environment at no cost. Now there are not many times that you can say that, we are going to give you something for free. I know there is no such thing as a free lunch but we are talking about practical and free initiative.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
The only thing I will touch on that I would disagree with you, Tony, on is banning alcohol in parks.
Stop the Drop:
It can be done under an arrangement where if it was an event, or something of that nature, and I know where you are probably coming from, that people would go out, have a glass of wine with groups at a park and whatever, yes, they would be penalised. But we have got an area, I will use the Parade Gardens because historically characters in there hung around opposite the Arts Centre. They had to move them away because there was so much grief caused with them using that site, all the benches were taken away. They moved into the market, the benches were moved and shifted around and eventually they were pushed out of the market, so they moved to opposite the hospital. All those benches were removed. The moved on to the Don, the police used to move them on every morning at 6.00 a.m. trying to disperse them. Now they are camped in the Parade, they do not all come to the shelters. I have spoken to the chap that runs the shelter close to that site and he tells me the easiest way to help those individuals would be for a guy to go down everyday and a liaison officer to help talk them through the problems, talk them out, show them the alternatives and to win them over. He says it does work with those in the shelters, but only a small percentage of those characters are from the shelter. A little bit of investment, a part-time chap going down daily, getting to know the guys, getting them in, would help, but I do go back about 10 years when we had a group that camped out 24 hours a day for several months at Parade Gardens, and even now at the top end of Parade, there is no going there for the general public, they do not want to be surrounded by what it is going on, so they are not going to go up there and have a drink and a quiet time because they have been kicked out of car parks. You could say it raised our problem, nobody gave a thought where they were going to go; they are not going to stop drinking overnight without help. So that is
[11:45]
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
As you said it is no good just doing it in areas because they move elsewhere. You are just moving the problem away. But if you enforce it then you are penalising the majority for the minority that just want to go in a big group, as a family, and sit and have a barbeque or a picnic and a glass of wine.
Stop the Drop:
But they do not want to go and do that now because of the areas that we are looking at are no go. They do not want to go there. I mean I get no end of complaints from parents using the
playground in the Parade, and you are probably aware of some of those, they will not go in a lot of them. There is a lot of youngsters will not use that park, it is a town centre park, they should be able to feel free and easy to go there. They do not want to be confronted with somebody half unconscious on the grass, vomiting or whatever else he is doing. That is not what the park area is about. It is for all users. There is legislation if you are causing a nuisance to any other user in the park the police can be called. But who is going to stand up in court and say: "I saw that character and he was doing this, that and the other." People do not want to give that sort of time to that sort of offence. I did have a lady a few years ago that had an issue in Victoria Park, she got so fed up with it, the police popped around, parked outside her house. From that day on for many months there was a whole hail of cans and bottles there in her front garden because they saw them arrive and it is just unfortunate, probably an inexperienced officer that decided to park infront of her property and then from there went straight across and cautioned them all. It will not be dealt with, and I am saying it is a 2-pronged event. These individuals can be helped. It will take the State to do it. In Manchester they have done it, they have an area where they have a garden area in the town centre, they grow their fruit and vege, they are allowed to have a drink, but they have also got people on site that help, they liaise with them, they work with the Shelter Trust. These things are not here.
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
Because the choir started to do some work in that way, did they not, and it was very beneficial.
Stop the Drop:
But you just cannot abandon them at the end of that. They did, a choir practice. There is a whole programme of things they need and I am not an expert in the field, but the information I have had back is they need further help, they need more help for those characters that are out there at the moment. They see our wardens, they see myself, they see police officers, but that does not necessarily police it in the way that they need further help than that. But I do not know. It is a difficult one. I have cases which I am happy to leave with the Deputies for consideration to do with Eastleigh. They have got a fairly good site. They do have under their areas where they can grant a licence for a period of time or whatever. It is quite a big area to get into, but it has worked very well. They have had positive feedback.
I worked in Coventry when they introduced a city centre ban there. Coventry is an area, fairly urban degradation and there is a big alcohol problem. They introduced that, but they did leave certain green areas. I do believe that you are right, we should not be punishing the majority. I think number one, I think there should be an area around a playground which should be a no-drink zone, because I do believe that kids should be going there. I would go back, because I also worked in Manchester when they introduced the area for the people, they are going to go somewhere, so put them in an area that is controlled, and that the outreach workers can find them. I think that is a very, very positive area now. I think there should be certain areas where alcohol should be banned and I think we should also be tackling the problem, not just keep moving it round. Because all we have done is move them round town. They have ended up in an area where there are children. I would not like to take my grandchild to that area.
Stop the Drop:
It is a strange thing but the chap from Shelter Trust that was on the radio, John - I forget his second name - did tell me that wherever the guys congregate the outlets in the area all sell the cheapest,
strongest grade of alcohol and it is only those outlets that do it. That is targeting that audience. To me that is a bit beyond. That is something that could be approached possibly. They are the only people who drink the stuff, extremely strong. It is the cheapest you can get. It just seems that wherever these groups cluster themselves invariably they are targeted by having it on the door. We have looked at relocating them at South Hill to an area, give them some allotments and some sheds and other things, but we were advised they are not going to go up there because there is no outlet for them to go and buy their drink. We are stuck where we are. We would love to encourage them into People's Park area. You could lose them in a bigger park, but the central parks are too small, too intensive, too many people using them to put up with what we are putting up with at the moment. That is why I say, you know, specific sites, exclusion zone would help and if they did move out it would be for the benefit of the users, so if they go into a bigger site and not impinging and closing the site down.
Deputy J.M. Maçon:
Thank you very much but I do not think we have got any more further questions. Do you feel that there is any point you would like to reiterate, re-emphasise, perhaps not been given enough
force, perhaps you feel we have gotten the wrong end of the stick somewhere, or if there are any other points which you would like to make to us, please feel free.
Stop the Drop:
If you are happy I can leave my notes behind to do with Eastleigh and other areas. Examples of what the Mayor of London is trying to do for 2012, identifying the problems with gum and how they are doing it. They are pouring money into it, if you like, in conjunction with Wrigleys and all these other outlets and there are standards, and there is other government money going into it. I do not think Jersey is going to achieve it without it being politically driven and driving legislation through, but having community support with the shops, with people going out there, talking to the youngsters, the education, the whole thing as a package. It is not going to happen with one or the other. Where we are, we have legislation, we have a wonderful education system, but we are missing a big trick here somewhere along the line. The message is just not getting through and I think this is where targeting with one simple bit of legislation has worked wonderfully for speeding, worked wonderfully for urinating at night, 2 simple examples of where it can help and I think that is targeting and I think that would have a definite response.
Deputy J.M. Maçon: Thank you.
Town Centre Manager:
I think you have got the drop on nearly everything. On Stop the Drop, that is the right thing to say. Thank you very much for your time and trouble.
Deputy J.M. Maçon: My pleasure. Thank you
Deputy D.J. De Sousa:
Thank you, it has been very informative.
[11:51]