Agenda item

For the Sub-Committee to receive a presentation on the Specification for re-procurement of the Waste, Recycling and Street Cleansing Contract.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 17 to 28 of the agenda, which provided an update on the Waste, Recycling and Street Cleansing Contract Specification. The Director of Sustainable Communities introduced the item and went through the presentation at Appendix A.

The Chair highlighted the ‘Options Appraisal’ and asked whether any options had been disregarded at this stage. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that the only option that had been discounted was that of extending the current contract past 2025; delivery of services by in-house provision, re-procurement or Local Authority Trading Company were still on the table for consideration. The Chair asked if there had been consideration of delivering different elements of the service through a mix of these options and the Sub-Committee heard that this was still a possibility.

The Chair asked if officers were confident that the Council was within the timeline for delivering the possible options that had been set out, noting the need to account for the Greater London Authority (GLA) Collection Conformity assessment. The Sub-Committee heard that the GLA only looked at the collection element of the service and that the current provision already met the requirements of the GLA. Members heard that the GLA submission had already been undertaken, and that approval could take up to 108 days, which sat within the proposed timeline for the final officer recommendation to Cabinet. On the procurement pack, Members heard that officers were running activity for all options in parallel, and it was acknowledged that the timelines were tight but achievable. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that, if it were decided to go out to the market, then conversations would be consolidated where possible. The aim was for any contract to be awarded by early 2024, if this was the option that was chosen, to ensure there were 12 months for a contractor to purchase vehicles and be ready to deliver services.

The Sub-Committee asked how it was possible to ensure that any Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the new contract would be achievable, and how these would compare to other similar boroughs. The Director for Sustainable Communities acknowledged that the KPIs in the current contract had been set at a level that was too ambitious when compared to neighbours. Members heard that benchmarking with other authorities would take place to inform the setting of KPIs for the new contract, as well as incorporating industry standards; realistic targets would be set, with ambitious stretch targets to incentivise good performance.

The Vice-Chair asked what outcomes were being sought as a part of the new contract, and whether these would be realistic given potential costs. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that the report to the November 2022 Sub-Committee had included a breakdown of the indicative costs of the Options Appraisal, but that these would be sense checked for the final report to Cabinet; possible growth in this area had been highlighted in the Medium Term Financial Strategy. Members heard that there was a desire to maintain the current frequency of collections, which conformed to the standards set out by the Mayor of London, and to improve collections for flats above shops.

The Chair asked what could be done differently for collections for flats above shops and heard that the Council could consider a number of different approaches, such as a bag service or communal food collection points. The Director for Sustainable Communities explained that the specification would recognise the ambition to provide an improved service in this area, but that it would be for bidders, should the contract go to market, to explain how this would be achieved by looking at national best practise.

The Sub-Committee asked how it was ensured that lapsed Garden Waste collection subscriptions were not still collected. Members heard that there was a process in place for this that started with a notification to the resident, then to the contractor, and culminated in the removal of the Garden Waste bin. The Sub-Committee asked about missed Garden Waste collections, and the possibility of extending the service for the number of weeks the collection had been missed. The Head of Environment Services & Sustainable Neighbourhoods explained that it was not currently possible to automate this kind of process, as it required a manual investigation by an officer, and an officer decision on whether there would be an extension. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that any extension would be at the cost of the contractor, which was why due diligence was especially important. The Chair asked if officers were confident that all Garden Waste bins were being collected once contracts ended, and the Director of Sustainable Communities explained that the contractor was notified not to collect Garden Waste and to recover the bin. There were a number of reasons that bins might not be recovered, including theft and residents failing to present the bins for recovery.

Members asked what solutions would be considered for properties without the space to accommodate multiple wheelie bins. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that this was already in place through a box collection for certain streets and areas in the Borough; this requirement would likely be continued in any new contract to ensure bins were not left on the street. The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment explained that the quality of the boxes themselves could be looked at to ensure these were durable, with lids that were secure and not easily lost.

The Chair invited Councillor Ben-Hassel to ask a question relating to Environmental Enforcement. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained any option would consider how the service provider would deal with fly-tipping as a first contact to check whether there was any evidence that could lead to a Fixed Penalty Notice; this was a provision in the current contract. Members heard that evidence of this kind was relatively rare, but there were aspirations that the new specification sought a proactive approach to fly-tipping that was not just reactive to reports. Councillor Ben-Hassel asked if it had been considered that there be better join up between reporting and investigating systems for fly-tipping.The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that this was an aspiration for the future service and would be included in the method statement for this element.

Councillor Ben-Hassel asked if it had been considered if the contract could be broken up to be tackled by multiple specialist contractors and the Chair asked what outcomes had been seen from soft market testing. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that the market had moved to a more risk adverse approach due to market volatility, especially around the disposal of recyclates. Members were informed that guaranteed income was being considered for the new specification, alongside separating out disposal of recyclates from the main contract. The Sub-Committee heard that there was some nervousness around the decarbonisation of fleets, and that the Council needed to be careful about how electric or alternative fuel vehicles were considered for the future service.

The Chair asked how data sharing between contractor and Council systems would work for the future service. The Director for Sustainable Communities explained the current system had fully automated integration between the two systems that allowed for data analysis on fly-tipping hotspots and areas of repeated missed collections. Members heard that this would be continued in the future delivery of the service, but that consideration needed to be given as to what was required to tighten this up further.

The Director for Sustainable Communities explained that the Council owned the current Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) fleet, and had licensed them to the existing contractor. In response to questions about recruitment of HGV drivers in the context of shortages, Members heard that any prospective bidders for the contract would need to explain measures that would be used to address this, however, it was acknowledged that this was a national issue.

The Vice-Chair asked what collaboration was taking place with the Housing department on collections for estates. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that they had recently attended the Tenants and Leaseholder Panel to speak about the Council’s Housing Stock, and that it was understood that a Housing Waste Infrastructure review was needed to understand what had changed to ensure adequate bin provision; this would then feed into the future service delivery.

Members raised concerns about inflationary pressures on wages that had come close to causing industrial disputes under the current contract. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that indexation and inflation would be important aspects of any new contract that these elements would be up to date with best industry practice. Members heard that cost of delivering the service was discussed during annual reviews under the current contract, which could lead to elements being renegotiated, and it was important that any new service delivery made similar allowances.

The Sub-Committee asked if there were any non-essential aspects of the contract and heard that a great deal of the contract was statutory provision, with other elements mandated by GLA Collection Conformity. Street Cleansing was in line with best practice and there was scope to reduce the quality here to deliver savings, but it was questioned whether this was desirable. There were services in the contract that were non-statutory and were chargeable, and these included Bulky Waste and Garden Waste collections.

The Vice-Chair asked about how communication and engagement with residents could be improved. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that there was a South London Waste Partnership communication and engagement plan, but that there needed to be a consideration of targeted communications on what was needed for Croydon. It was highlighted that the Residual Composition Analysis suggested that there needed to be better engagement and education on recycling, which could help with communal waste collections to maximise the collection of recylates and resultant income.

Members asked about assisted bin collections and the Director of Sustainable Communities explained that a review of assisted collections had taken place recently to understand where these were still required. The review had reduced the number of assisted collections and going forward it was hoped this would be undertaken every couple of years as this had not been the case previously. The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment explained that they had undertaken walkabouts with crews and assisted collections had been identified as an issue due to the large number that had accrued before the review. The Sub-Committee suggested that those who only needed the service for a short time should be able to state this when they applied for it.

The Chair asked how it would be ensured that the current service was maintained to a sufficient level until the end of the existing contract in 2025. Members heard that performance would be monitored, as it had been, in addition to the continued use of the performance bond. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that the current contractor would also likely want to bid for any new contract, which would incentivise good performance.

The Chair asked about hotspots for missed collections, poor street cleansing and fly-tipping, and heard that these were monitored through daily conversations with the contractor to see what could be done to address identified area through targeted responses. The Sub-Committee heard that fly-tipping was a challenge in the North of the borough, and this was difficult to tackle given the requirements of needing to witness perpetrators in the act; there was an aspiration to try more innovative ways to tackle fly-tipping and change behaviours as part of any future service delivery. The Cabinet Member for Streets & Environment explained that they were keen to educate residents on reporting through the proper channels to try to build good data on hotspots so that they could be better tackled; work on this had already begun with residents groups, and would hopefully continue with ‘Street Champions’.

The Vice-Chair asked about resident awareness of the bulky waste collection service and whether better awareness, or reduced charges, could result in lower levels of fly-tipping. The Director of Sustainable Communities acknowledged that there were probably some residents who were not aware of the service; having been through periods when the service was free and charged, as it was currently, had not shown an impact on the levels of fly-tipping in the borough. The Chair asked about cases where fly-tips had been reported, and then moved on to private land by contractors; the Director of Sustainable Communities responded that this was not acceptable and that they would look into this personally.

Members highlighted cases where residents were required to separate different types of waste by different bags, and replacement bags were not being provided in a timely manner. It was asked if this type of collection would continue under a new service or this would be replaced with wheelie bins. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that the vast majority of properties did use a wheelie bin, but a bagged service was provided to some properties who were unable to accommodate wheelie bins; the challenge around the bag service was that bags were provided by the contractor and it was acknowledged there could be delayed. The Sub-Committee heard that this was a performance issue that could be picked up with the contractor. Wheelie bins were the preferred solution, and any individual cases of kerbside properties that could accommodate bins using a bag service would be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

The Chair invited Councillor Ben-Hassel to ask a question about whether Bulky Waste collection would be looked it from a social enterprise perspective to enable at the reuse of waste items.The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that this was already something that the Council considered but that more could be done to innovate on ‘circular economy’ practices under any new service delivery.

Councillor Ben-Hassel asked what the Planning department could do about flats above shops without the necessary waste infrastructure under the upcoming Review of the Local Plan. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that there was a limited amount that the planning authority could do for these types of development and acknowledged that this was a challenge. There was limited provision for off-street bins, but Members heard that there were conversations that could take place with freeholders and shops. The Director of Planning & Sustainable Regeneration explained that this was a planning consideration for these types of application but this was a complex area.

The Chair asked how Members would be able to collaboratively feed into the process going forward, in lieu of a cross party working group. The Director of Sustainable Communities explained that the Resident Survey results would be used, alongside the points raised at Sub-Committee meetings to inform the development of the contract. It was explained that a holistic approach was preferred over Member focus groups as it was felt that this would provide more representative data from a larger set of Croydon residents that also included Councillors. Preliminary feedback from the Resident Survey had only just been received, and focus groups with residents would be meeting to discuss issues raised in the survey alongside telephone interviews; this would be combined into a report that would be completed in April 2023.

Conclusions

The Sub-Committee were of the view that officers and the Cabinet Member had a good understanding of the work that needed to happen, but Members acknowledged that it was a challenging market for Waste, Recycling and Street Cleansing.

Recommendations

1. The Sub-Committee recognised the large number of households in the Borough that used communal bins, and recommended that this was a focus in the specification of the Waste, Recycling and Street Cleansing Contract Specification.

2. The Sub-Committee recommended that a dynamic approach to behavioural changes was adapted as a part of any future service delivery to ensure effective engagement and communications with residents.

3. The Sub-Committee recommended that there was a continuation of an ‘as-is’ service for residents in terms of collection frequency.