Agenda item

To receive and note the update.

The DFC introduced the report and informed Members that the Environment Bill was now on its third reading in the House of Lords and expected to gain royal ascent with no further substantial changes. He added that the Bill would outline the Government’s environmental targets and expectations, and introduce a new regulatory body called the Office for Environmental protection. It was reported that efforts would be made to make greater use of waste as a resource, such as the extended producer responsibility, that would define the level of recyclable materials required in products. The DFC stated that this would be supported by an additional levy for producers that did not meet the required standards. A deposit return scheme had also been proposed, though details of how this would operate, such as reverse vending machines were yet to be confirmed. It was noted that reductions in packaging had impacted the Council’s recycling rates, which in addition to the deposit return scheme, would limit the Council’s ability to market its recyclable materials. The DFC stated that the most notable element of the Bill was the inclusion of a mandatory requirement for separate food waste collections from 2023. He added that the Council was prepared to offer this service, as it had been included as a costed option during the procurement process. It was noted that new burdens funding was expected to cover the costs of the additional collections. The DFC reported that a further initiative included encouraging trade waste customers to better separate their waste and recycling. He added that there were still issues that required clarification, such as free garden waste bins, and increased enforcement powers for environmental crimes.

The DFC reported that the Serco waste contract had faced a range of difficulties during the Pandemic, which included significant increases in the weight and type of waste being produced. The DFC stated that there were also issues with HGV driver and fuel shortages, despite the requirement for Serco to provide its own fuel storage facilities. He added that whilst service disruption had been minimal, many of the requirements outlined during the bidding process were not being met. It was suggested that it may therefore be useful for Serco officers to attend a future meeting to answer questions on when contractual obligations would be met.

Questions and Discussion

       i.          Cllr S Penfold asked whether Serco had failed to meet the targets set-out within their contract, and whether there were any issues in supplying brown bins to residents. The DFC replied that there were performance standards failures in the contract, but it was difficult to determine whether these were being triggered, as Serco had not supplied the necessary performance data. He added that there were further contractual issues in addition to delayed collections, such as the re-use service for bulky items that was yet to be implemented. On brown bins, it was reported that whilst delivery had been delayed during the early stages of the pandemic, it had resumed once Serco were operating at capacity. The DFC reported that new brown bin deliveries had been put on hold more recently, as a result of shortages in materials required. He added that deliveries had now resumed and arrival could be expected shortly.

      ii.          Cllr H Blathwayt stated that there appeared to be issues with collections in hard to reach areas, and supported inviting Serco to a future meeting to explain these issues. He asked how residents could better report delayed or missed collections to the Council. The DFC replied that there had been issues in delivering the smaller waste collection vehicles, as a result of delays caused by the Pandemic. He added that existing hire vehicles were well used, and Serco had therefore faced issues with reliability. In reference to reporting delayed and missed collections, the DFC stated that it was difficult for residents to know the difference between delays and missed collections, and service updates had to be improved to address this.

     iii.          Cllr A Brown stated that he was pleased to hear that food waste costs would be covered, and asked whether there was a dispute resolution process within the waste contract, and whether it was being used to resolve the issues discussed. The DFC replied that the fuel storage tank was ready to install, though Serco had to take responsibility for the delays. He added that there was a dispute resolution process within the contract, though this was for serious failures, and the service was not considered to have reached this point. It was noted that Serco had not billed the Council for some months, and the level of service failure deductions was not yet known, though they would be held to account for poor performance if necessary.

    iv.          Cllr T Adams noted that he had received positive feedback on Serco’s green space maintenance, but concerns remained around domestic waste collections. He asked whether the new burdens funding for food waste collections would be sufficient, and whether Serco had a long-term plan to ensure that they could maintain the required number of HGV drivers. The DFC replied that there was a programme in place to internally train and recruit HGV drivers, and that the new burdens funding was not yet known, so it was not yet known whether it would be adequate.

      v.          Cllr V Gay stated that Serco must be held to account for not delivering the additional services offered within its contract, and stated that it was a significant concern that the level of food waste required a national collection service. She added that encouraging composting would be positive step and asked whether a national policy of waste reduction could be expected in the future. The DFC replied that a waste reduction policy would be included in the Environment Bill, though greater pressure would be required from consumers to substantially reduce waste.

    vi.          The Chairman stated that it would be beneficial for Serco to attend a future meeting and requested that this be added to the Work Programme.

RESOLVED

1.     To receive and note the update.

ACTIONS

1.     DFC to arrange SERCO briefing/attendance at future Committee meeting.