From April,Islington Council Will Fine People For Not Recycling.

12346

Comments

  • edited 3:33AM
    Of course, in this instance the council won't be prosecuting or harassing anyone based on what they're doing in their own homes. Steve, if you - or the hypothetical old dears who are even more easily confused than you - wish to mix up all your recyclable and landfill waste within the home, then knock yourself out. Store it all up like Mr Trebus. Mix it together and roll around it, whatever. Just so long as it's all properly sorted by the time it hits kerbside which - by definition - is not inside anyone's home.
  • edited 3:33AM
    To be serious for a moment:

    adads - if you had acutally had a conversation with Mr Trebus (RIP) at his home in Crouch Hill; and you had heard what he said about what he had been through in his life, then maybe you wouldn't be so patronising in the tone of your pompous comments. Mr Trebus done well considering what he went through many years ago in his past.

    I just assume that you are ignorant of what Mr Trebus went through in his life adgs or I doubt you would be making these comments now.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Edmund Trebus, who has died aged 83, lived much of his life in conflict. The details of this existence were recorded three years ago in the BBC television series A Life Of Grime, which featured Trebus battling with Haringey council, in north London, over his rubbish-filled garden. The details of his early life were sketchy, but those who knew him had little doubt that the harsh experiences of his youth had had a profound and lasting effect.
    Trebus was born in northern Poland, where his father, Francicszek, was station master in the small town of Ostrowo, outside Gdansk. The family lived in a house near the railway. It was a peaceful existence, brought to an abrupt end when Edmund's father fell to his death through the ice of a frozen lake.

    This personal tragedy was followed by global calamity when, on September 1 1939, Hitler invaded Poland. The Nazis justified this act of aggression by saying they were returning German-speaking Poles to the fatherland. In fact, like their neighbours, the Trebus family preferred to speak Pomeranian Polish, something which earned Edmund a beating from German soldiers.

    The details of Edmund's war experiences, as he related them, were confused. He made repeated mention of being imprisoned and mistreated - years later, as his London garden was being forcibly cleared, he likened local council officials to the Nazis. He also took great exception to being described as a tank driver; he was, he retorted, a tank commander.

    Army records show that Trebus did, indeed, serve with the 1st Carpathian anti-tank regiment of the Polish Free Forces in Italy, in 1945. He had joined as a corporal cadet after being captured while serving with the German army in France. Like many German-speaking Poles, he had been forcibly conscripted by the Nazis.

    After the war, Trebus joined the Polish resettlement programme, then moved to London, where he married and had five children. The family moved to Crouch End in the early 1960s, and it was there that he first became a serious collector. At first, his obsession took the form of mild eccentricity. He filled the upstairs rooms of his four-storey Victorian house with the spoils of hunts through local builders' skips and junk shops. One room was packed with vacuum cleaners, another with cameras. Trebus bought every recording he could find by Elvis Presley.

    As time passed and his children moved out, the collections piled one on top of the other, like sedimentary layers, until each room was full to the ceiling. Trebus would push a small cart around the streets of Crouch End, gathering discarded building materials, which he carefully arranged in the garden, doors in one corner, windows in another. There were washing machines, wood, motorcycles and bicycles. There was even one of musician Dave Stewart's old synthesisers, retrieved from the back of his recording studio. Like all the objects, it came to be forgotten about and covered up over time.

    Trebus's neighbours remained on surprisingly good terms with him, while, at the same time, making vociferous complaints to Haringey council about the growing health risk from the rats which infested house and garden. His wife used to sit in her deck chair on a patch of grass, surrounded on all sides by a growing mountain of junk. In 1981, she left - and he covered that patch too.

    By 1998, Trebus was reduced to living in a small corner of his kitchen, surrounded by newspapers and children's toys, with only his Jack Russell terrier for company. The garden was so full of junk that he needed ladders to get in and out of his house.

    After years of legal wrangling, Haringey council decided to act. When its clearance team erected scaffolding, Edmund, then aged 80, climbed up with a pair of mole grips and tugged at the bolts holding it together. He was arrested, and the contractors moved in. Freed from the cells several hours later, he returned to argue, with wit and infuriating logic, about the value of almost every item in the 515 cubic yards of rubbish they removed.

    Trebus welcomed the BBC, believing that the presence of cameras offered him a measure of protection. This relationship continued, and, on October 13, the BBC film Mr Trebus: A Life Of Grime, will be shown. Last year, Trebus gave up fighting and moved to Haringey council's Trentfield residential care home to spend his final days in peace.

    · Edmund Trebus, born November 11 1918; died September 29 2002
  • edited 3:33AM
    Bored and no longer care due to repeated thread bludgeoning
  • edited 3:33AM
    Quite. Classic TNH.
  • edited 3:33AM
    You go on a bit yourself miss annie,

    "No offense" - as the south african lady on the perfume counter says in the fast show comedy sketch - after she says something offensive - so good that lady with south african accent in fast show -
  • edited 3:33AM
    It almost makes one miss Tollington Tom dunnit.

    Well, not quite.
  • edited 3:33AM
    So what, Trebus was in the Wehrmacht and then said afterwards that he didn't want to be, just like Pope Sidious, while also bigging up his rank? Not a standard Crouch End childhood, sure, but I've met people who were on the other side of the Wehrmacht out East, right down to seeing the numbers tattooed on their arms. They had a damn sight tougher time of it and none of them felt compelled to collect rubbish in later life.
  • edited 3:33AM
    the mr pooter and mrs mopp characters who write their comments on this forum might like to read this comic novel which satarises them:

    Diary of a Nobody From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Jump to: navigation, search

    The Diary of a Nobody, an English comic novel written by George Grossmith and his brother Weedon Grossmith with illustrations by Weedon, first appeared in the magazine Punch in 1888 – 89, and was first printed in book form in 1892. It is considered a classic work of humour and has never been out of print.

    The diary is the fictitious record of fifteen months in the life of Mr. Charles Pooter, a middle aged city clerk of lower middle-class status but significant social aspirations, living in the fictional 'Brickfield Terrace' in Upper Holloway which was then a typical suburb of the impecuniously respectable kind. Other characters include his wife Carrie (Caroline), his son Lupin, his friends Mr Cummings and Mr Gowing, and Lupin's unsuitable fiancée, Daisy Mutlar.

    The humour derives from Pooter's unconscious gaffes and self-importance, as well as the snubs he receives from those he considers socially inferior, such as tradesmen. In The Diary of a Nobody the Grossmiths create an accurate if amusing record of the manners, customs and experiences of the Londoners of the late Victorian era.

    The book has spawned the word "Pooterish" to describe a tendency to take oneself excessively seriously.[1][2]

    Pooter is mentioned in John Betjeman's poem about Wembley.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Please do continue cutting and pasting - it's more informative than what went before.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Or better yet, link to it and leave it at that?
  • edited 3:33AM
    We mustn't be bullied by recycling tyranny
    Anne McElvoy writes this, today, in the Evening Standard
    30 Mar 2011

    An envelope with the word "Compulsory" in bossy black type lands on the mat. What now? Has the Revenue run out of patience? Is the repo man en route?

    It turns out to be Islington council's charm offensive on "compulsory recycling". Not content with us sorting our rubbish into two lots to recycle, we are brusquely informed that from April 4, recycling food waste will be mandatory and that a visit from an "officer" will follow if we do not oblige.

    "We all have an obligation to recycle as much to save money that can be spent on important Islington services," intones the website. I don't know who is doing the obliging here, but this ukase comes with as little consultation as the average Kremlin directive and about the same tone of voice. No real consultation, no alternatives, no incentives - just a "do as you're told". The strident voice of the self-righteous town hall telling its citizens how to live is clear as a bell.

    Food waste is messy and unpopular. The technology of it is primitive: sloppy brown bucket in the kitchen attracting fruit flies and other interested creepy-crawlies, coupled with even bigger sloppy and unsightly bin on the doorstep emitting smells for a week while the council get round to picking it up. The "we" who it claims have an "obligation" to recycle food in the way that it dictates are in fact not required to do anything of the sort.

    If the council truly intends to use its powers (questionable legitimacy here) under Section 46 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, it deserves the backlash it will most certainly get from reasonable people.

    It is not up to a local authority to demand that we behave in a certain way because its budgets are being tightened. Neither does it take an oversensitive ear to perceive the politics of grievance masquerading as environmental concern.

    Islington, says the website, is home to many low-paid people (true). "To protect your services we need to save money by recycling." What does the sentence mean? That the services will be threatened if we don't fill up the slop box appropriately?

    Or that this is a moral duty bound up with concern for the poor? It is, like so much local authority communication, an illogical, ill-argued document topped off with a whip-cracking threat of a penalty if we don't agree.

    "Don't worry," breezes the leaflet. "We're not trying to catch anyone out." In which case, how can it be compulsory and prominently announced as such? Recycling advisers can "issue fines" if people are "deliberately not recycling" and our "rubbish bins may be visually inspected". It sounds pretty much like a catching-out exercise to me. But not recycling food waste is not illegal and it is cynical of the council to present its case as if it were.

    Yes, people are susceptible to rational argument about the environment. They might even by persuaded to engage in the thoroughly unpleasant business of food waste recycling - not that there is any evidence the borough is trying to make this any easier for residents.

    The very best way to turn us into a resistance force is to treat us as simpletons to be bossed and threatened. Let's tell them that, if the officer comes to call.
  • edited 3:33AM
    The failure to see how something can be compulsory without thereby intending to catch people out suggests a basic failure of reading comprehension.

    Granted, the example of parking enforcement since that became a council matter does not bode well. But if a different directorate with a different attitude are in charge of recycling enforcement, it need not necessarily go the same way.
  • IanIan
    edited 3:33AM
    I think that article is quite well focused. I have no problem with the basis for the council's decision, but unless they offer proper facilities for recycling this isn't an appropriate policy. They need to think through the burden on residents and make it as easy as possible for recycling before imposing a fine. As long as they have smelly food buckets (and they kept losing mine), small boxes with no lids for paper that allows rubbish to be strewn across the street and bins that don't take enough capacity this is not an enforceable policy in any rational way. The different way in which the council has historically sorted out its refuse policy is compounded by this - i.e. the old Liberal Democrat council made sure their wards had big wheelie bins and regular refuse removal. we still have the old style bins that were used in the 1980s. It's not a rich or poor or flat issue. The Council has to give proper facilities, at which point it may be right to say we should comply with the rules. At the moment it requires us to live with smell, mess and rubbish to comply with their plan. It is not acceptable until they have put the onus on residents to resist, rather than the onus to comply. So - Islington council, give us all proper bins for green and household waste, not boxes with no lids and smelly plastic trays. Then, and only then, is it right to push us to comply.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Has anyone else noticed Haringey (yes, I know, not Islington) not collecting the food recycling? We've had ours ignored for two weeks in a row now, and now there's a rumour going around that its the recycling collection folk protesting against government cuts. Anyone know anything of substance about this?
  • edited 3:33AM
    I live above a shop and rubbish has to be put out between 7-8 on the road. I always burn mail with my name on it before disposing (you should all shred or burn it to avoid identity theft, kids). They will NEVER know which household has left the recycling and rubbish out from our street. NEVER! *evil laugh*
  • edited 3:33AM
    I'd just like to congratulate SG Steve on achieving 166 comments about recycling. While admitedly many are his own, i never thought it would make triple figures.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Anne McElvoy writes about the brown food waste container attracting flies and the Islington Council, stasi style, "compulsory recycling information leaflet" that they delivered to everyone in Islington borough: in this bossy, pushy and authoritarian council leaflet there is a photograph of a dead fish that has been cut up with a knife.The council say they want dead fish and eggs and egg shells put into the "sloppy brown bucket" that Anee McElvoy writes about. So Islington council want smelly dead fish sitting in your kitchen in their slops bucket rotting away this is unhygenic because of the smell of rotting fish etc. This is disgusting to try and make old people do this.
  • edited 3:33AM
    i cannot be arsed to read all of the comments but the last one by sg steve forces me to ask him and the evening standard woman to shut their gobs as they have clearly never bothered using the brown recycling bins before complaining about them. i have had one in my kitchen and one outside for three years and have never had a single fly circling them, or a single whiff of anything nasty - i line it with a carrier bag then a cornstarch bag which the council keep giving me loads of, along with free supplies of charcoal filters to stop condensation. i squeeze bleach in it once every couple of months and pour it down the drain then put it back outside to dry. not hard, even if you're old. and i then only have to empty my kitchen bin once a week and it never gets smelly any more.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Sophie - I wonder if guests that visit you at your home would agree that there is no smell coming from the rotting meat,eggs and fish in your brown recycling caddy in the kitchen or from the slops bucket sitting by the front door.Perhaps your fragrant and sophisticated guests are too polite to mention a waft of rotting mackrel and eggs that greets them at the front door or on entering the kitchen? Or maybe you have a poor sense of smell or are just aren't bothered about maybe stinking the place up without realising it? I don't see why you think the evening standard lady should "shut her gob" as you rudely write,aren't people rude on this forum,she is entitled to her opinion whether she has used council slop buckets or not. I think it would be better if people were more polite to each other here.
  • edited 3:33AM
    yeah he totally got me there. god i feel stupid.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Why? Because TNH, oops sorry SG Steve, suggested that you have no sense of smell and your house stinks of fish?
  • edited 3:33AM
    Sophie - the word "God" should have a capital letter G,just incase he does exist,better to be safe than sorry.

    I don't believe in God,but I imagine most of the people on this forum do believe,judging by the style of some of their comments so a capital G incase he does exist.I wrote incase "he exists" because God would be a bloke there is no way God would be a bird.Because then God might get a "time of the month moment" and say send a thunder bolt down to wipe out Tottenham.On second thoughts,maybe that would be a good thing. A female God would not be right though.

    No need to feel stupid Sophie just because you recycle your food.

    I like the fact that Mr Trebus called Haringey Council a bunch of Nazis and they couldn't tell him he was over reacting as he had been captured by Nazis himself,so had first hand experience. Good man.

    I am not saying Sophie's house defintiely smells of a combination of fish and eggs and other rotten food,I am just saying that we can't be sure that it doesn't,best not to make assumptions.

    carry on
  • edited 3:33AM
    carry on what? My favourite was "...screaming". And of course "...up the Khyber Pass", but that's everyone's favourite. To make it more entertaining, could you extend your sign-off to include a different film each time?
  • edited 3:33AM
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Or how about "piss off". I think that one would get a lot of use on this thread. On the point of stinky-ness, this is a by-product deemed unacceptable by western cultures. The fact is, we consume, we waste, we produce stink. We should get more used to that and accept is in a less childish fashion. If we smelled the results of our behaviour more often, perhaps we would think more carefully about what and how we consumed. @Sophie, I go through almost the exact routine you do and like that I rarely have to empty my bin. I do sometimes get flies if the caddy has taken longer to fill, but that's part of the eco-system, I put it outside and it feeds the bird and what-not. I try to use bleach less often as its bad for the environment. The caddy does stink sometimes, even though I use the bags. But when its closed, you can't smell it so much. If it puts people off, then they wouldn't come round. But it doesn't and they do.
  • edited 3:33AM
    SGS, if you're capitalising God then you should also capitalise He when talking about Him. I downcase both, also christianity, because I dislike his arrogance in attempting to monopolise the generic term for deities and apply it to himself. If you met a man who just wanted to be called Man, it would be a good indicator of a dickhead. Same here.
  • edited 3:33AM
    Aren't fanatical recycling types uptight and rude,sincers wrote "p-ss off" and Sophie wrote "shut your gob". take a chill pill n chillax...

    adgs- on a religous theme - JC was a hippy so respec but...

    Jesus was a chippy, had a good job and a good solid trade as a carpenter,but he gave it all up to become long term unemployed,he grew his hair long and wandered around palestine with his mates wearing sandals and saying that he was the "son of God".He didnt like sunday trading so he went down to the local market and smashed it up,and he claimed he could "walk on water and turn water into wine". If the local paper reported that a " long haired,long term unemployed man had smashed up Chapel Market on Sunday Morning" - would people still be worshiping that man 2000 years later or would he be arrested and given a fine?

    carry on
  • edited 3:33AM
    Well, back in the day he got arrested and crucified, which is somewhat harsher. Though if he had only been fined, I wonder if his followers nowadays would wear final demands around their necks instead of crosses?
Sign In or Register to comment.