Fly tipping in Kent County Council: a battle fought on many fronts

Introduction

Kent County Council recently hosted a countywide fly tipping conference: Turning the tide on fly tipping for a cleaner Kent, bringing together councils, enforcement agencies, landowners and the waste industry to take coordinated action against fly tipping and waste crime. 

Here I share the outcomes of that conference, the action plan and my discussion with two participants – Jason Hedges, Environmental Crime Team Leader, Canterbury City Council and Mathew Smyth, Director for Environment and Circular Economy, Kent County Council.  This article considers why a conference was needed, what was achieved and what comes next for Kent.

Why now?

Both Jason and Mathew made the point that councils and partners are fighting what might feel at times like a losing battle against fly tipping.  

Mathew shared that the conference made it clear that the only way to prevent fly tipping is to work in partnership across organisational and geographic boundaries. In his words, “It is time to make fly tipping everyone’s business, while mitigating the risk that everyone’s business becomes no one’s business.”

Jason spoke about the importance of defining the problem and for councils to hold people to account and be seen to take action. Jason said there are real risks with fly-tipping, and that organisations can be seen to take a “nanny state” role, as excuses are repeatedly rolled out, including “bulky uplifts are too expensive” or “I did not know (or check) the guys who took my waste were cowboys”.

Enforcement is tricky, and fines are paltry compared to the impacts and cleanup costs. In that context, it is hardly surprising that often councils just do the clean up, as there will be many elected members who want this solution and many communities for whom a quick cleanup prevents further dumping.  

Both Mathew and Jason mentioned the broken windows theory, which states that visible signs of disorder and neglect – such as broken windows, graffiti, or litter – encourage further antisocial behaviour and serious crime. This theory suggests that maintaining public order through low-level interventions prevents community decline.

Evidence 

The well-attended, multi-disciplinary conference considered an extensive data set that enables measurement of the problem, shows what is happening and where the illegal activity happens: ‘hot spots’. Evidence shows most fly tips in Kent are cleared from the highway.

In summary, Kent is particularly vulnerable to fly tipping in part due to its sheer size of landmass and amount of roads, many of which are in rural locations. Data indicate that since 2018/19, reports of fly tipping on public land have increased. Enforcement actions have increased, and the tonnage of identified fly-tipping material from public land has gone down, but there was an increase in 2024/25. However, reported court fines have fallen, and only five fines over £5,000 were recorded since 2018/19.

Both interviewees asserted that the quantitative data show the problem is worsening and that enforcement and real deterrents are lacking. The qualitative experience of cleansing teams confirms that the dumping of, for example, soft furnishing, is becoming an almost daily occurrence.

We spoke about the end of the college term, when almost every street corner will be littered with bags and other items left beside bins as students clear out. I am sure every council will recognise this issue. In addition, we considered that maybe Covid-19 times started allowing some poor habits, when fewer people, including council teams, were out and about, and people could fly tip without being seen. 

To be clear, this is not a Kent-specific issue; it is happening all across the UK. It actually defies logic that fly-tippers drive from Birmingham and in some cases Scotland to fly-tip in Kent. 

This example of successful prosecution by Redbridge Council shows the lengths the people behind illegal activity will go to. The complexity, time scales and work involving the council’s teams and partners, including courts, to get a prosecution; but note the fine was only £4,000. 

Whilst there are some early signs that fines will increase and the law will be strengthened in reality fines are small, and it is incredibly difficult to enforce and takes time and money. Also, where do the court fines go? Are fines ever actually collected? And the monies from court imposed fines do not go back to councils.

Is it any wonder that, given the emotional and environmental impacts on communities, councils often act to clear up before things get worse.

Importantly, Kent is currently considering both urban and rural fly tipping as the issues are different and require different solutions. Kent has many miles of rural roads, byways and paths all vulnerable to fly-tipping. 

Fly tipping accounts for a huge proportion of rural crime, and this quote from a countryside alliance survey brings this home: “In most crimes, the victim gets sympathy. In fly-tipping, the victim (the farmer or landowner on whose land the fly tipping occurs) gets an enforcement notice and a clean-up bill.”

Next steps

The conference focused on four key themes and identified actions and partners for each.

1. Intelligence sharing and early intervention
2. Enforcement and visible deterrents 
3. Supporting rural communities
4. Prevention duty of care and consistency

The conference concluded with a commitment to develop, finalise and publish the Kent Fly-tipping Action Plan; establish partner-led working groups aligned to the four workshop themes to stay connected, share successes and issues and make progress. And agreement around a Shared Commitment:

“We will work together to deliver practical action that reduces fly-tipping, protects our communities and supports a cleaner Kent.”

Final thoughts

After discussing the thorny, growing and costly problem of fly tipping, it is my sense that Kent County Council is demonstrating leadership, drive and energy to work within a complex and crowded landscape to tackle fly tipping, 

A vital theme that we touched on was the need to pull all the levers at councils’ disposal. You cannot cherry-pick one solution that works in one area; rather, you have to do it all, and keep doing it, back to that point about consistency. 

They are also taking steps to change what can be done by deepening existing partnership working with the police, the Environment Agency (EA), the National Farmers Union (NFU), and, importantly, with communities affected.  In the medium term, working to improve enforcement, increase court involvement, and educate communities. We’ll return to this conversation in twelve months to share what has been achieved.

Finally, my thanks to Jason and Mathew for sharing their insights and experience.