"Take part in consultation not petition"

Reform UK County Councillor Jason Isherwood is urging residents to take part in a public consultation on Glossop Household Waste Recycling Centre, as debate continues over proposals to close the site. 

Cllr Isherwood is encouraging people to make sure their views are submitted through the official process, amid concerns that separate petitions circulating locally could be mistaken for part of the consultation itself. 

He said that while petitions can demonstrate strength of feeling, they do not carry the same formal weight in the council’s decision-making process: “The consultation carries democratic and procedural weigh,” he said. “A petition may reflect public opinion, but it has very limited formal influence on the final decision.” 

He added that there is a risk some residents may feel they have already had their say by signing a petition, and therefore not take part in the official consultation when it opens. 

The future of the Glossop site has sparked ongoing debate, including questions around how usage figures have been calculated. Addressing the issue, Cllr Isherwood called for a more measured and evidence-based discussion. 

“The debate around Glossop HWRC needs to be conducted carefully, calmly and honestly. 

The council’s “7 in 10” figure was always presented as an estimate, not as a direct count of every individual user of the site. It was derived from ANPR and vehicle registration analysis over a longer period, which gives it some breadth, but it was not based on direct on-site measurement of Glossop users themselves. That means it should be treated with caution, not certainty. 

“At the same time, the opposition’s attempt to dismiss the council’s case by relying on a single day of on-site data collection is no more conclusive. A one-day sample at the correct location may tell you something about that day, but it is far too short a period to provide a robust statistical basis for firm claims about long-term usage patterns. This does not compare like for like, in that on different days the end users will vary accordingly between domestic and commercial, either way the sample is too small. 

“That is the central point: two flaws do not make a fact. 

“One side has longer-period data derived indirectly. The other has direct-location data derived over far too short a timescale. Neither, on its own, is strong enough to settle this question beyond reasonable doubt. Neither should be overstated for political convenience. 

“My position is straightforward. If Derbyshire County Council wishes to rely on usage patterns as part of the case for closure, then the evidence must be robust enough to bear that weight. And if opponents wish to rebut that case, they must also do so on the basis of evidence that is statistically credible, not anecdotal or selective. 

“The responsible course now is not point-scoring. It is to obtain and publish better evidence: clear methodology, transparent assumptions, an honest explanation of uncertainty, and data gathered over a sufficiently representative period at the actual site in question. 

“A decision of this importance should not rest on weak inference from one side or weak sampling from the other. It should rest on sound evidence. Until that exists, the right approach is caution, transparency and proper scrutiny.”