A CHAWTON man has hit out at East Hampshire District Council’s (EHDC) zero-tolerance litter campaign, not because he resents being “caught in the act” but because the £75 fine, he believes, is disproportionate to the size of the crime.

As, he adds, is the zeal with which the environmental enforcement officer handled the case.

But EHDC says that by imposing such a fine people will think twice before dropping litter, something which will help address the district’s litter problem.

While holding up his hands to the crime of dropping what turned out to be “a very expensive cigarette” butt on Alton High Street, and aware that it is “an offence to litter”, Christian Dupont is nonetheless registering an official objection to the size of the on-the-spot fine, which he describes as “a truly obscene amount for such a crime”.

Mr Dupont is particularly concerned that delivery of EHDC’s litter enforcement campaign is being outsourced and that the level of fine is set to allow a third party to make a profit, rather than EHDC using the money raised by fines to off-set government cutbacks and to clean up the streets.

He has had it confirmed that EHDC receives just £30 from every £75 fine.

As such, there is no real financial benefit to the tax payer and all EHDC has succeeded in doing is alienating the voting public, he says.

At the time he was caught and fined, Mr Dupont said that he asked the environmental health officer to accompany him to Lady Place car park, to the raised flower beds opposite the Thai restaurant which, he claims, are full of cigarette butts.

Mr Dupont has maintained these beds for the past two years and has, he says, complained many times about this issue, but to no avail.

“The fact is that it poses a continual health and safety threat that has gone unresolved and yet members of the public are being fined for the same crime just 40 yards away.”

He drew attention also to the fact that the patrols do not appear to work after dark, thereby avoiding those who may litter the streets at night.

“It appears to be one rule for some, one rule for others,” he said.

In registering his objections to EHDC, to Alton Town Council and to district MP?Damian Hinds, Mr Dupont is questioning also the legitimacy, under the Data Protection Act, of a non-council contractor taking pictures of an offender dropping litter.

He said: “Are the people of Alton, or any other town subject to the same policies regarding litter, aware they are being selectively filmed by employees of sub-contracted third party companies? And what happens to this footage?”

The second member of his family to feel the heavy arm of EHDC’s contracted environmental enforcement team within a period of just two weeks, Mr Dupont believes that this “over zealous” approach to cleaning up Alton’s streets will “reinforce a negative image of an already stressed and suffering High Street”, and he would like to see an end to the practice of “handing easy cash to third party contractors by targeting hard-working people in the middle of the day.”

Mr Dupont has since received a response to his concerns from an EHDC customer services manager, who points out that the size of the fine is determined under the code of practice on litter and refuse, as set by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, which enables local authorities to levy a fine of between £50 and £80. EHDC settled on £75.

He was also told that in East Hampshire the current anti-littering pilot scheme is being outsourced to Kingdom Security, and it is due to end on March 31. The district council is only invoiced by Kingdom for tickets issued. The £30 received by EHDC is being used toward the administration cost of the contract, to contribute to the replacement of and additional bins in the district.

In Alton, 13 bins have been replaced with larger capacity bins (increased from 90 to 120 litres) with ashtrays on top.

While patrols will increase with the lighter evenings, an assurance was given that Kingdom contractors must be open about deploying their cameras and that any footage remains the property of EHDC and will be retained for just 30 days after the courts have made a ruling.

Furthermore, Kingdom officers were said to be under no employee pressure and therefore have no reason to be particularly zealous in carrying out their duties, although they are contracted to issue fines.

In a general statement, EHDC remains keen to defend its zero-tolerance policy. The statement read: “Litter is a big issue for many people in East Hampshire and we have made it clear since the launch of the scheme last year that if people are caught dropping litter, such as cigarette butts and chewing gum, or allowing their dog to foul, then they will be fined. The level of fine is a national standard, in line with other authorities.

“We hope that by imposing such a fine people will now think twice before they drop litter and that will help us all keep the district clean and clear.”