Denying the bleeding obvious

The switch to fortnightly refuse collections has left many people in need of a service that, naturally, the market has begun to provide.

This is the spontaneous order in action. We can't necessarily predict exactly what people will want or need (although in this case it was a fairly easy call that fortnightly rubbish collections weren't going to cut it), but by examining post hoc the behaviour of the market, we can quite well determine to order of events and their motivations. In this instance, we can conclude that people feel that fortnightly rubbish collections are thoroughly inadequate so are prepared to pay privately for extra collections, and that they exist in sufficient number that others are prepared to undertake to provide such a service in the belief that they can meet the costs they will incur and perhaps even make a small profit. The comparative absence of the profit motive serves only to highlight the inadequacy of the fortnightly collection: this service is being offered on environmental and public health grounds.

Naturally, therefore, the head of waste and something called "street scene" in the district has raised his head from his busy work to announce to the world his ignorance of these simple economic concepts: "People living in the district pay council tax to have their waste and recycling dealt with; there really is no need to be paying any extra."

Clearly there is, you dolt. If there weren't, you would be able to point to the fact that no-one is bothering to pay any extra to make up for the shortfall in service. But since people are paying extra to make up for the shortfall in service, your statement is remarkably stupid.