Wardens brought in to crack down on litter in a Kent district have dished out almost a quarter of a million pounds in fines in just four months, KentOnline can reveal.

Figures show National Enforcement Solutions (NES) has ordered wrongdoers to cough up £150 for dropping rubbish 1,650 times since its officers started patrolling Canterbury, Whitstable and Herne Bay in May.

Canterbury City Council had hoped the company would help it reduce the amount of litter strewn across hot-spot beaches during the summer months.

But the findings - obtained through a Freedom of Information request by KentOnline - show one in three of the fixed penalty notices were instead issued in the district’s most deprived ward, Northgate.

Meanwhile, just a fifth of the fines were meted out in Herne Bay and Whitstable.

One of Northgate’s councillors, Alan Baldock, believes the wardens are preying on “easy targets”.

“It’s such small-scale littering that they’re policing,” the Labour politician said.

“People should not be littering - it’s inexcusable.

“But it’s disappointing when the wardens go after the easy targets, rather than those piling rubbish in alleyways and behind homes.

"These are people that should be being charged.

“NES has completely missed the point of the whole problem - they’re just there for a deterrent money-making scheme.”

Since NES’s contract began, its wardens have been able to dispense £150 fines - which are reduced to £100 if payment is made inside 10 days - for littering and dog fouling.

The company receives 70% of all revenue it generates through the charges, with the remaining 30% going to the city council.

Data shows it has netted the authority up to £74,400, while generating a potential £173,600 for itself.

River warden and litter-picker Sian Pettman thinks NES’s financial incentives are preventing it from effectively reducing rubbish-dropping.

“Their aims are not to solve the problem,” she explained.

“Their aims are to make a profit as a company and to fine as many people as they can so they can make more income.

“Their goals are different to those of the community, who want to keep their area clean, and I think different from the council’s goals.

“What I would really like to see is the authority have its own environmental protection officers rather than outsourcing to a private company.”

Despite the huge number of fines issued, council leader Ben Fitter-Harding insists the program is not a money-driven exercise.

“NES do very good work for us - they’re a great resource,” the Conservative argued.

“For the council’s part, yes, we receive part of the profit - but that money is reinvested into enforcement across the district. For example, it helps to subsidise parking officers.

“The vital thing here is that people don’t litter in the first place.

“If they drop gum and cigarette butts then we have to pay people to clean that up and that costs the taxpayer more money in the long run.”

NES took over from Kingdom LA Support after its predecessor came under fire for focusing too heavily on smokers.

Kingdom was criticised for targeting “easy pickings” as it generated more than £48,000 for the local authority last year.

In the first nine weeks of Kingdom’s three-month trial, 96% of fines dished out were to people dropping cigarette ends.

Council officials have also conceded that a “significant majority” of the penalties handed by NES have been for discarded butts.

But the new wardens appear to be more efficient at ordering waste-droppers to pay up.

Analysis suggests it could make the council £223,000 by the end of its 12-month contract, if wardens continue at their current rate.

Responding to concerns about the scheme, council spokesman Rob Davies said: “We realise not everybody supports the idea of litter enforcement, but fundamentally, we don’t actually set out to fine anybody.

“We simply want a clean district - so if you don’t want a fine, don’t drop litter. It really is as basic as that.

“It is definitely true that a significant majority of fines are issued for discarded cigarette butts. We make absolutely no apology for this and are certain we have the support of local people.”

Mr Davies stresses that by using the private company to “enforce day-to-day street litter offences and issue on-the-spot fines, we free up our own environmental enforcement officers to focus on other crimes, such as fly-tipping and graffiti”.

“As part of the 2022/23 budget, councillors agreed to invest £250,000 a year in the grounds maintenance contract, which is responsible for the team that picks up litter and empties bins on the coast and in the council’s parks and open spaces, as well as an extra £32,000 in street cleaning,” he added.

“While we acknowledge nobody likes to receive a fine, this type of enforcement work, alongside the additional cleaning resources in place, will together result in a cleaner district for everyone to enjoy, and that can only be a good thing.”