The scheme set up to target litterers by issuing on-the-spot fines has received backlash online. Now, new data has revealed Manchester City Council gets a fraction of the amount actually served in fines.
The so-called ‘Litter Police’ has been a controversial subject in Manchester. Run by a private company on behalf of Manchester City Council, it has issued nearly 25,000 fines to people for dropping cigarettes over the past three years.
The Environmental Enforcement Agents – as the Litter Police are formally called – are trained and managed by a private contractor, 3GS.
Their role is to patrol areas of the city centre issuing fines to those they see littering.
But figures obtained by a Freedom of Information request revealed the council made less than £500,000 from a possible £3.5 million in revenue from the fines issued by 3GS agents.
Lib Dem councillor John Leech said: “Why are the council getting so little?
“The council should be doing more to make sure they’re getting the right money back and to change people’s behaviour in the first place.”
Of the £3.5m issued, just under £2m was ever paid; and the council – due to the terms of their contract – receives only 25% of this leaving them with a take-home of £492,927.
3GS – who advertise a “zero-cost” solution to environmental crime – retains 75% of the money it gets from any fines it serves.
The remaining quarter that goes to the council is spent on ‘administrative costs’, including legal fees pursuing those caught, or it is reinvested into the environmental budget.
Cllr Leech continued: “Either the enforcement is not effective or the 25% is not enough to enforce it properly.”
Payment of the fines is a major issue with the scheme. More than 40% of the 24,829 fines issued in the past three years were not paid.
The contracting of a private company also caused concern.
Green Cllr Rob Nunney said: “Public services are not there to make a profit, they should be brought in-house so that there isn’t a middle man making a profit out of it.”
This sentiment was shared by Cllr Leech: “There used to be an attitude where out-sourcing was always the cheapest and always the best option – if it’s not working outsourced the council should be looking at if it is better to bring it in-house.”
Some members of the public in the city centre questioned using a private firm to fine people, rather than an official body like the council or police.
Paul, who preferred not to be identified further, said: “It’s a good idea in some respects with regards to litter in the city centre. What I do have issues with is the ability for someone to impose a fine on you.
“It’s a company with its own agenda, they’ll have targets, they’ll have profit to make.”
And Matthew Strong, 22, said: “It works as a way to stop littering, I guess, but I don’t think they should follow you around. It’s a bit too overbearing, a bit too much in your face.”
A lack of oversight concerned Green councillor Ekua Bayunu, who said a resident of her ward had spoken to her about being fined by 3GS.
“There was no appeals process, no evidence provided, nothing,” said Cllr Bayunu.
“When a service like this is subcontracted, I wonder how closely a company might be scrutinised. How it will ensure its service is in line with the professed policy of anti-discrimination that the council holds itself to.”
A TikTok account @dangleeballsyoutube has garnered millions of views from his videos informing people of the rules when caught, allowing them to not be issued with a fine. On their most viewed video the caption states: ‘Only £30 goes to the council, the rest stays with this private company. £120 is far too much!!’
@dangleeballsyoutube Any donations buy coffee whilst I save people. Only £30 goes to the council, the rest stays with this private company. £120 is far too much!! Share the knowledge #3GS ♬ original sound – Dan Gleeballs Scambaiter
Others we spoke to, who had seen the videos, were not fazed by the 3GS agents.
Owen, 22, said: “I’ll still smoke and drop my cigs, I’ll just walk off whenever they come to me.”
The council is increasing street cleaning funding by £700,000 in 2023 due to a rising number of complaints about litter. It suggests that the threat of fines for littering is not providing much of an incentive to stop, especially as people become more savvy about what the Enforcement Agents are legally allowed to do.
A need for change is clear for the policy to succeed. Cllr Bayunu suggested an alternative option – an on the spot fine.
She said: “Thinking about the risks posed to society by speeding drivers, I wonder that drivers are offered speed awareness training, but our pedestrians are not offered any alternative to a fine, if their behaviour is judged to be a risk to society as a whole.”
Alternative policies by the council to curb littering have also stalled. The introduction of 200 bins, for which funding had already been laid out, has yet to happen.
The contract for the policy is up for tender this year with a potential that a new firm is contracted or even the possibility of bringing the environmental enforcement agents in-house, though no budget has been set aside for this.
Manchester City Council and 3GS were approached for comment on this article but declined to respond.
