Agenda item

The reasons for the call-in are:-

·         The decision departs from the principle of protecting front line services.

·         Consider the implications for the cleanliness of local streets.

·         Consider the implications of prompt identifying of dumped rubbish and

           their removal.

·         Consider full and effective consultation with local residents on this.

The Executive report is attached. The Lead Member and Lead Officer are invited to the meeting to respond to Members’ questions.

 The reasons for the call-in were:-

·         The decision departs from the principle of protecting front line services.

·         Consider the implications for the cleanliness of local streets.

·         Consider the implications of prompt identifying of dumped rubbish and

           their removal.

·         Consider full and effective consultation with local residents on this.

Councillor J Moher (Lead Member for Highways and Transportation) introduced the report and advised that the proposals were part of the additional savings that were required.  Negotiations with Veolia, the waste and street cleansing contractor were to take place with the intention of reducing costs.  The main proposal was the option to decrease the sweeping frequency for Zone 5 streets to twice weekly sweeps.  Members heard that some streets in Zone 5 were not necessarily swept three times a week every time under the current arrangements. Councillor J Moher added that the council was reviewing all its contracts in all service areas with a view to seeking more for less because of the council’s financial situation.

With the approval of the Chair, Elaine Henderson addressed the committee.  Elaine Henderson stated that she was speaking on behalf of her residents’ association.  She commented that there had been a large improvement in the cleanliness of streets since the contract agreed in 2007 and she hoped that the high level of cleanliness would be maintained.  Members heard that the street cleaners provided a decent service, showed initiative and also played a useful role overall for the community.  Elaine Henderson suggested that the main method to achieve savings should be through reducing waste that went to landfill to reduce landfill tax costs. 

During discussion by Members, Councillor Brown sought views with regard to the impact on street cleanliness as a result of reducing the sweeping frequency in Zone 5 streets.  He asked for clarification with regard to the total savings target and had this factored in the £0.25m cost required to implement the savings measures and whether this would also impact on summer season sweeps and leaf fall collections.  Councillor H B Patel commented that street cleaning was one of the most visible council services to residents and visitors to the borough and he felt there could be risks involved in maintaining standards with less resources.  In view that the Olympics was less than two years away, he enquired what steps were being taken to ensure high levels of cleanliness to satisfy both residents and visitors to the borough.  Councillor H B Patel also commented that there may be legal complications in respect of seeking changes to the existing contract.

Councillor Mistry asked if there were any implications for the street washing service and whether residents’ views had been sought with regard to fly tipping during the consultation.  Councillor Denselow enquired whether frontline staff would be protected when introducing savings measures.  He referred to the importance of residents’ perception of cleanliness in the borough and asked how the changes to the street cleaning service would be communicated to them.  Councillor Kabir sought assurances that street cleaning on the same day after Wembley event days would remain.

Councillor Lorber (Chair for the meeting) sought clarification with regard to some streets in Zone 5 not receiving three sweeps per week as he understood that this had been specified in the contract and comments with regard to the need to consult residents about changes to the contract.  He asked how concerns raised by the contractor with regard to summer season sweeps and leaf fall collections would be addressed.  With regard to option three, further integration of special collections and cleansing, he asked at what level would any increase in bulky waste collection requests would affect implementation.  The Chair asked whether any increase in complaints as a result of changes to the service had been considered and if the costs involved in dealing with more complaints had been factored in. 

The Chair commented that a need to improve waste collection and street cleaning had been clearly identified in 2006 when consultation had shown that residents had perceived the borough as unclean.  Since the contract had been upgraded in 2007, there had been an emphasis on improving services as opposed to previous arrangements where the contractor had decided what areas required attention.  The upgrade had resulted in significant improvement in both street cleaning and waste collection, however the Chair expressed concern that these improvements were in danger of being undermined by the changes proposed.  With regard to the free bulky waste collection, the Chair commented that a relatively few number used this service, whilst all residents required a street cleaning service which may be compromised by the changes.  He felt that reducing frequency in street cleaning for Zone 5 streets may offer an easy solution to generate savings, however he opined that some Zone 5 streets were not receiving adequate cleaning even under the three visits per week that they were currently receiving and streets such as Fernbank Avenue and Rosebank Avenue would visibly suffer as a result.  The Chair suggested that Zone 5 streets be reviewed on a street by street basis to identify what the appropriate level of cleaning should be and street cleaning needed to be protected from savings initiatives in view of the high public profile of this service.  He also sought details with regard to independent surveys being undertaken to obtain the views of residents.

In reply to the issues raised, Councillor J Moher acknowledged the comments made and he stressed the need to maintain the quality of service. He acknowledged that there had been a significant improvement in the cleanliness of streets and reduction in complaints since the upgraded contract had been agreed in 2007, however he commented that there was anecdotal evidence to suggest that not all Zone 5 streets were cleaned three times per week.  He stressed the importance in monitoring the cleanliness of Zone 5 streets to ensure standards did not drop, however in some streets the frequency of cleaning required was less.   Councillor J Moher advised that there was no legal requirement to consult residents over changes to the contract as it was a matter between the council and the contractor.  It was possible that the contractor may challenge the changes proposed, however they were minor in nature so the risk of this happening was low.  With regard to summer and leaf fall collections, Councillor J Moher advised that the same level of service was expected of the contractor and added that this was another example of the council seeking better value from its contracts. 

Councillor J Moher informed Members that an independent report had concluded that the cost of waste collection and street cleaning contract was high compared to other local authorities and this highlighted the need to seek better value from the contract through negotiations.  Whilst savings were sought out of financial necessity, every effort was being made to maintain front line services.  By maintaining standards, it was expected that residents would not have need to register complaints.

Councillor Powney (Lead Member for Environment, Planning and Culture) added that sub-dividing Zone 5 streets in terms of frequency of street cleaning had been considered, however because of the village system used by the contractor such a measure would be too complicated to implement at a practical level.

Chris Whyte (Head of Environment Management, Environment and Neighbourhood Services) advised that the contract had specified that streets were required to be at cleanliness levels A or B as per EPA guidance.  It was for the contractor to determine what level of frequency was required to ensure streets reached this level of cleanliness.  It was felt that the changes proposed for Zone 5 streets would not have any noticeable effect on cleanliness for these streets.  Monitoring officers would play a crucial role in reporting the level of cleanliness of these streets and to make the necessary representations to the contractor if there was a drop in standards.  Chris Whyte advised that the contractor had included an option to clean Zone 5 streets twice a week in their tender for the 2007 contract.  Summer and leaf fall collections were a separate issue from street cleaning and the contractor would be required to maintain the same level of service under the terms of the contract.  With regard to street washing, the contractor had two vehicles at its disposal to undertake washing sessions on an ad-hoc basis.

With regard to bulky waste collections, Chris Whyte confirmed that demand had risen, however it was yet to reach a level which may require a review of how it may affect the ability to merge the street cleaning and bulky waste collection services.  He confirmed that complaints were at an all time low and it was not envisaged that the changes would give rise to an increase in complaints.  Members noted that there was a £700,000 savings target for street cleaning changes and £500,000 from waste collection, however it was now anticipated that the total savings achieved would be £1.5m as opposed to the objective of £1.2m.  Chris Whyte confirmed that Wembley Event Day street cleaning came under a separate agreement which required same day cleans and Wembley Stadium contributed to the costs to provide this service.  He advised that the Residents Attitude Survey had identified street cleaning as one of the most appreciated services provided by the council and he reaffirmed that the contractor would be obliged to maintain all streets at cleanliness levels A or B, regardless of the frequency of cleaning.  The Keep Britain Tidy Group undertook public surveys on a ‘mystery shopper’ basis and this was undertaken three times a year, with the next two due to be undertaken between  December 2010 and March 2011 and April to July 2011.  The survey scored cleanliness by a grading of streets and incidences of fly tipping could influence the overall grading.

The Chair then indicated that in view that this item and the item below were inter-linked, consideration of any recommendations would be undertaken after both items had been discussed.