* Cleanzine-logo-7a.jpgCleanzine: your weekly cleaning and hygiene industry newsletter 5th December 2024 Issue no. 1141

Your industry news - first

The original and best - for over 20 years!

We strongly recommend viewing Cleanzine full size in your web browser. Click our masthead above to visit our website version.

Search
English French Spanish Italian German Dutch Russian Mandarin


 

Welcome to the Cleanzine

logo_small.gif

In last week’s Leader ( https://thecleanzine.com/pages/22426/leader/ ), I argued the case for us to be proactive rather than reactive to the problems of litter and bulk illegal waste dumping, highlighting the differences between the way money was spent in two parts of the US, and how this impacted on the amount of litter that ends up being dumped in those localities. 
  
Amongst the many interesting responses that came in, was an email from another reader ‘with some compelling questions from across the pond’, (as he put it) who wished to play devil’s advocate. He stated: “The 8% spend on the prevention of litter in Philadelphia did not happen by accident. It is a choice that has been made over the years to reach this low level.” He went on to say: “If this is true, then what does that say about the priority of litter prevention for the folks who enabled this low percentage to be allocated? I propose that the cause of the excess litter in Philly is simply that the majority don’t care about how their surroundings look. Yes, some do care, such as the author of the article you drew our attention to, along with the Mayor and I’m sure many others. But the majority likely doesn’t care as much, at least not enough to change their own habits to enable a better environment. Pittsburgh cares more, leading to a higher percentage dedicated to prevention, and actual better conditions. No matter how much money is allocated, if a significant percentage of the population doesn’t care, the area will still be littered. Is there a poll of the entire population providing an indication of what percent do care, enough to change their own habits if they are also offenders? Food for thought…” 
  
One of my arguments has always been that we need to make it as easy as possible for members of the general public to deal with their own litter responsibly. That means plenty of litter/recycling bins for us to use – and which are emptied often and not left to overflow, good refuse collection services and fully accessible civic amenity tips that are free-of-charge and open to the general public for long hours 7-days/week. Without this, I feel we’re on a hiding to nothing. I know this costs money, but when one considers the blight of litter on our environment, the safety issues involved and the costs to clean it up, surely that’s money well spent? 
  
What do you think?
 

FB.jpg

 www.facebook.com/Cleanzine

 

Twitter-t.jpg You can also follow us on Twitter @cleanzine


Yours,

JAN.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Jan Hobbs

18th April 2024




© The Cleanzine 2024.
Subscribe | Unsubscribe | Hall of Fame | Cookies | Sitemap