Agenda item

Decisions made by the Cabinet on 21 July 2014 in respect of the following report below were called in for consideration by the Scrutiny Committee in accordance with Standing Orders.

Changes to Recycling and Green Waste Collections

The attached report sets out the decisions of the Cabinet and the call in details. Also attached is the original report that went to Cabinet, together with a supplementary report.

Decisions made by the Cabinet on 21 July 2014 in respect of the following report were called-in for consideration by the Scrutiny Committee in accordance with Standing Order 20.

Changes to Recycling and Green Waste Collections

The decisions made by the Cabinet on 21 July 2014 were:

RESOLVED:

(i)         that approval be given to increasing the frequency of the dry recycling service to a weekly service;

(ii)        that approval be given to the extension of the separate food waste collection service to all street level properties;

(iii)       that approval be given to the introduction of a chargeable garden waste collection service as the means of facilitating these improvements as set out and detailed in section 4 of the report;

(iv)       that the financial and non-financial benefits that will accrue from these changes be noted;

(v)        that approval be given to the amendment to the Public Realm Contract and the minor changes to the contract targets to allow these proposals to go ahead.

The reasons for the call in are:

Whilst not opposing the principle of charging for garden waste, members consider that the system proposed could be improved on.

There was concern at the absence of crucial information in the report including:

o   a proper analysis of options available to the council

o   consideration of up front payment (covering collection and disposal) for recycling bags rather than an annual charge

o   clear financial information regarding risk/gain to Brent Council and Veolia 

o   information about market research undertaken with residents on options likely to achieve good recycling rates

o   how Brent can seek reciprocal arrangements with neighbouring authorities so increasing drop off points. The only site proposed in the report is at Abbey Road

o   learning from other local authorities

o   contamination of dry recycling/kitchen waste

o   monitoring and enforcement

o   communication with residents.

An outline of the suggested course of action of the Scrutiny Committee is to:

o   seek a report responding to the concerns outlined above

o   question lead member and senior officers and the leader

o   if necessary, set up a very brief task finish group to examine these issues in more depth.

Additionally, reference was made to residents’ concerns about the charge and the implications. Further clarification was requested on:

o   the way the decision was made

o   what would have changed within a year of a new contract, to justify such big change or adjustment

o   the framework is in place for monitoring and reporting

o   the financial implications for the council in relation to the scheme.

Whilst not opposing the principle of charging for garden waste, additional concerns were expressed at the absence of crucial information in the report including the failure to:

o   demonstrate VFM (value for money)

o   show financial information containing savings from decommissioning existing garden waste service

o   give financial information regarding risk/gain to Brent Council and Veolia

o   model other alternatives, available to the Brent Council and consider their financial and environmental impact.

Scrutiny Committee is asked to:

o   seek a report responding to the concerns outlined above

o   question lead member and senior officers 

o   if necessary, set up a task group to examine these issues in more depth to ensure VFM.

Finally, representations expressed the concern that a flat fee was regressive, and referred to lobbying by the Mapesbury Gardening Group, environmental groups and local residents. The main concern was that the arrangement may not represent value for money once scenarios for unintended consequences were included in the model.

Scrutiny Committee is asked to:

o   invite the Lead Member, the Leader and appropriate officers to address these issues.

The Chair then invited Councillor Nerva, one of the councillors who had called in the item, to outline the reasons for call in. Councillor Nerva stated that he believed there was an opportunity to improve on the value for money presented by the proposals on recycling and green waste collection. He felt that the report that had been presented to the Cabinet had failed to sufficiently detail alternative options for collection, such as up-front charges or charging for bags, and that further information was required to assure members that the council was achieving the best possible financial outcome. Councillor Nerva emphasised that he felt that there had been limited information provided on the comparable activities of other local authorities and that there were a number of details about the proposals that warranted further investigation. In order to minimise further delay, it was suggested that a task group be established by the Committee to investigate the details of the proposals and report their findings to the next meeting of the Cabinet.

The Chair thanked councillor Nerva for his contribution and invited representations from members of the public who had submitted notice of their wish to speak on the item.

Mrs Stephens, Chair of the Sherbourne Gardens and Winbourne Drive Residents Association, advised that on speaking to residents she had found that there was a general feeling that the proposed new arrangements for recycling and green waste collection had not been properly thought out. There was a concern that introducing an annual charge for this service of £40 would encourage increases in hard landscaping with resulting negative impacts for natural drainage, an improper use of the grey bins for garden waste, and fly tipping of garden waste.

Mr Kitchen, a resident of the borough, expressed his support of the comments of Mrs Stephens and voiced his concern that the proposals appeared to relate to a summer service only. Mr Kitchen advised that he was also concerned about the security of the new bins to be provided for food waste and the difficulties that may be caused to residents if bins were stolen.

Responding to issues raised, Councillor Perrin (Lead Member for Environment) emphasised that the contract had been negotiated via a process of Competitive Dialogue and represented good value for money for the council, resulting in savings of £1.3million in the first year of the contract, rising to £1.7million  in subsequent years. The proposed annual charge for the optional garden waste collection would also provide a further £400K minimum income stream for the council. Outlining further benefits of the proposed new arrangements, Councillor Perrin advised that it was currently 50 per cent cheaper to process separated green waste. It was not anticipated that the new arrangements would significantly increase the level of landfill but if it did, this would be a cost borne by Veolia as there was an agreed cap on the level of landfill for which the council would be charged. Councillor Perrin also clarified that collection of garden waste would be bi-weekly during the summer and would continue to operate on a monthly basis during the winter. 

The committee was then invited to discuss the Call In. Confirmation was sought that the Lead Member and Lead Officer were confident that the contract represented value for money and met the needs of the borough. Members queried why additional options, such as the sale of biodegradable bags for green waste, would not be offered under the new arrangements. The committee sought further information on the anticipated affect of the proposals on issues such as fly tipping and improper waste disposal. A number of detailed queries were made regarding the operation of the new arrangements; members asked how secure the new food waste bins would be, whether families could request more than one bin if required, and sought clarity on the charges that would apply for garden waste, particularly whether the charges would be fixed for the duration of the current administration . It was highlighted that residents in Kilburn did not have the green waste bins and the committee queried how those residents would be affected by the changes. It was further queried what arrangements were in place to store the green waste  bins that would be removed from those residents choosing not to subscribe to the scheme. The committee also sought details of the communications strategy for informing residents of the changes.

Commenting on concerns expressed by residents, members noted that residents might feel that the application of a standard charge for garden waste, irrespective of the level of waste produced was not fair.  It was further noted that the new arrangements for garden waste collection would commence from 1 March 2015 but that in preparing for this, those residents choosing to opt out of the scheme would have their green waste bins collected, leaving them unable to utilise the existing service. A member queried whether consideration had been given to providing those who opt out of the garden waste collection service with a free compost bin. Officers were also asked to comment on the possibility of delaying implementation of the garden waste collection service. With reference to the savings that would be delivered via the proposed changes, members queried what alternative action would be required if the changes were not implemented.

Councillor Perrin asserted that the contract was flexible and provided best value for the council. He further stated that he considered that the proposals were fair to residents as an equal charge would be applied to all who used the service.

Sue Harper (Strategic Director of Environment and Neighbourhoods) expressed her confidence in the contract and explained that the council, via the Competitive Dialogue process, had driven down costs and negotiated a better quality of service. The contract was designed to be flexible should any changes be required and would be subject to close monitoring and periodic review. Sue Harper further explained that as the current provider for the council, Veolia had been able to offer value for money for the proposed services by making use of the existing green waste bins. The offer of additional options for disposal of garden waste, such as providing and collecting biodegradable bags in addition to bins, would result in a system more complicated to administer and would be more costly to the council. It was confirmed that feedback had been obtained from other local authorities with comparable schemes during the process of negotiation and based on the information received it was not anticipated that there would be an increase in fly tipping as a result of the new arrangements for recycling and green waste.

Addressing the impact of delaying implementation of the scheme, Sue Harper explained that the implementation schedule had been arranged to minimise disruption for residents. Those choosing to opt out of the garden waste collection scheme would have their green waste bins removed during the winter months, outside of the growing season, with the new service due to commence from 1 March 2015. In addition, Veolia was currently awaiting confirmation that it could proceed with its order of new vehicles required for the dual collection of dry recycling and food waste. Delay beyond August 2014, might require that the scheme be delayed for a further year. There were no pre-identified alternatives for delivering the savings that would be produced via the proposed changes to waste services.

Chris Whyte (Head of Recycling and Waste) advised that the food waste bins that would be provided to residents had been designed for the purpose, were lockable units and would be ‘fox proof’. Responding to members’ queries regarding the garden waste service, he clarified that residents could subscribe to the service for a charge of £40 per annum. This charge was subject to review at the end of each year. In addition to the annual charge, residents who did not opt in to the scheme initially and subsequently had their green waste bins removed would have to pay a further one-off charge of £40 for the bin. Veolia would store the removed bins and had sufficient space in their two depots located in Brent. It was emphasised that there would be no change to the type of garden waste that could be disposed of via the service. Chris Whyte acknowledged that there were a number of households in the borough that did not currently have bins for green waste and confirmed that everyone would have the opportunity to subscribe to the new garden waste service. He explained that a comprehensive communications programme was planned to inform residents of the changes to recycling and green waste collection; this would encompass sending leaflets to all households in the borough supported by face to face engagement. Sue Harper confirmed that the communications programme would be initiated following confirmation that the Cabinet decision was to be implemented.

The Chair invited questions from the audience. Mr Lorber commented that though there was detail in the report to Cabinet of what other local authorities were charging, information had not been provided on the frequency of service and that he felt that there was insufficient explanation of the financial information provided. Another member of the public made comment on the timing of the choice to pursue changes to recycling and green waste collection.

Thanking everyone for their contribution to the meeting, the Chair acknowledged the concerns raised and suggested that on-going scrutiny of the contract would be necessary. He proposed that in view of the flexibility of the contract, a review be held following a period of 9 months. The committee agreed to the Chair's proposal and, in light of concerns raised regarding the removal of green waste bins prior to the commencement of the new scheme in March 2015, agreed that efforts should be made to ensure the removals be as close as possible to this date.

RESOLVED:

    (i)        that the decisions made by the Cabinet on 21 July 2014 regarding changes to recycling and green waste collections be noted;

  (ii)        that a review be held following a period of 9 months;

 (iii)        that efforts should be made to ensure the removal of the green waste bins be as close as possible to 1 March 2015 to minimise inconvenience to residents.