A COUNCIL chief has put his hand up to say sorry that a promised recycling bonus will not now materialise.

An annual £10 bonus was agreed last year by Teesdale District Council social and environmental policy committee on the advice of expert Dave Gaster, who was brought in as project manager. He thought it would encourage a culture of recycling among residents resistant to change. It was due for payment this month to those who had put out their boxes at least 21 times out of 26 fortnightly collections. But last month, the D&S Times revealed that the money was unlikely to be paid.

At Wednesday's meeting of the committee, chief executive Charles Anderson said: "I don't relish the idea of going back on the council's word. But we have to acknowledge that we are sorry, we don't think we can pull this off. We need to look at other alternatives available to us."

Members heard from Mark Ladyman - the council's director of community services, who was appointed when Mr Gaster left - that if only half the residents met the qualifying criteria, it would cost the council £60,000 a year.

"It does leave the council in a rather embarrassing position," he said.

Coun John Watson was deeply concerned that the authority had entered into a commitment it was not able to honour.

He felt that penalty clauses should have been applied to the manufacturers and suppliers who had let them down with delivery times for the recycling boxes and barcodes.

However, Coun Madeleine Walton, who called the whole project a fiasco from the start, did not feel the money ought to be paid out.

"It is not proper to do this when we are taking money away from the community alarm trust," she said. "If you don't have the wit to recycle your rubbish, then I don't think a tenner will convince you."

The chairman, Coun Ken Robinson, said they had brought in an expert (Mr Gaster) from outside to introduce the wheelie bin and recycling system without any hitches, but had been left to pick up the pieces.

Members agreed that the £10 payment - which would have gone to residents or their nominated charity - should not be made this year, and should be replaced next year by a scheme which did not have an adverse effect on the council's financial position.