Hastings District Council councillor Wendy Schollum says proposed amendments to the Litter Act would allow litter control officers to issue fines even if they don't catch dumpers in the act.
Hastings District Council councillor Wendy Schollum says proposed amendments to the Litter Act would allow litter control officers to issue fines even if they don't catch dumpers in the act.
If a letter with your name on it is found in a pile of rubbish left on the roadside, it can’t be used as evidence to fine you.
But a Hastings councillor says proposed amendments to the Litter Act could in future allow that level of enforcement, and give thegreen light to councils pinging fly-tippers long after they have fouled roadsides and private land and caused environmental harm.
Large piles of dumped rubbish cost councils around Hawke’s Bay thousands of dollars a year to dispose of.
Hastings District councillor Wendy Schollum says, as the law stands, even when a name and address are found, councils’ hands are tied.
“The dumper has to be caught in the act before we can do anything.”
That’s almost impossible when the fly-tippers use isolated roads or the cover of darkness to dump their trash.
Schollum said councils were working under a law written in the 1970s, long before the explosion of fast food packaging and the rise in illegal dumping.
Under the proposals to amend the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) and Litter Act 1979 (the Litter Act), litter control officers would be able to issue fines using vehicle registration and vehicle ownership details.
Schollum said the consultation document also asks if people support lowering the threshold for evidence and if they support enabling litter control officers to use different levels of compliance tools.
“What this signals is a shift toward more practical, real-world enforcement, where councils can act on evidence like identifying documents or vehicle details when there’s reasonable cause, particularly in cases of repeat or large-scale dumping.”
Councils would also be able to recover clean-up costs from the offender if the dumped rubbish caused significant environmental harm and there would be tiered penalties based on the seriousness of the offence.
Schollum said she imagined councils would have a warning system for different degrees of littering.
Rubbish dumped on the Hawke's Bay Expressway near Kennedy Rd.
“We won’t be turning up at your door waving a big stick. We will need reasonable evidence before taking any action.
“Someone throwing rubbish out the car window will not be treated the same as repeat offenders who don’t care that ratepayers have to pick up the bill for their actions.”
Schollum said Hastings had more than 5200km of roads, and many of the worst-hit areas were on NZTA-managed land where the council wasn’t allowed to clean up.
“What’s more, roadside safety rules also block many community-led clean-ups. Which means rubbish builds up, public pride takes a hit, and ratepayers keep footing the bill for the limited clean-up we can legally do,” she said.
A spokesperson for the Ministry for the Environment said the Government was progressing changes to make waste legislation more effective, clear and consistent.
The changes would replace the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 and the Litter Act 1979, aiming to reduce inefficiencies and clarify the roles of central and local government and the waste sector.
“The proposals are based on building on and improving existing legislation, to ensure it is fit for purpose,” the spokesperson said.
Schollum said the proposed amendments were important.
“This is exactly the kind of smart, enforceable change our communities need.”
Consultation on the proposals closed on June 1.
The ministry spokesperson said feedback from the consultation will help inform further policy work and the drafting process it will undertake with the Parliamentary Counsel Office.
