The Chair referred to the Kent online article about the report and considered it was not as ‘damning’ as it could have been.  He referred to some of the comments on the article which said there had been a ‘cover-up’ and he felt that this may be because the report outlined what had gone wrong rather than who was to blame.  He said it was a good report and thanked Members and officers for their input and gave particular thanks to the Policy & Engagement Officer and said she was a huge asset to the Council.

The Policy & Engagement Officer introduced the report which summarised the scrutiny review of the mobilisation of the new waste and street cleansing service for Swale.  It described the process taken in carrying out the review and set out the conclusions and recommendations proposed by the member panel going forward.  The Policy & Engagement Officer referred to the Appendix conclusions and recommendations set out at Appendix I of the report for Members to consider and agree.

The Chair invited Members to make comments, and points raised included:

·         Welcomed the review and report, and thanked the Waste and Street Cleansing Scrutiny Review Member Panel who had worked really hard to provide the recommendations;

·         given there were 23 recommendations, did not consider there had been a cover-up;

·         important that Members were kept up-to-date with progress of the recommendations and how they would apply to any future contracts;

·         referred to recommendations (12) and (23) and considered that they exposed some real issues during the height of the issues and that there needed to be some flexibility during the 34-hour week;

·         this was a very constructive report;

·         it was important point that the Council learnt from mistakes made;

·         there were still issues with missed collections in some areas of the borough;

·         it was regrettable that only one tender had been received;

·         officers should have spoken to other authorities that had used Suez;

·         data-transfer had been the main issue;

·         the re-routing of areas should be looked at annually;

·         it was clear there had been no oversight by the Environment and Climate Change Committee;

·         the document retention policy needed to allow flexibility so that learning could be carried forward for lengthy contracts;

·         it was important that all Members understood the scrutiny process and asked that member training be provided;

·         the contract should be considered by the committee every six months;

·         the working group should consider the item prior to being considered by the Committee on a bi-annual basis;

·         the recommendations were an example of excellent member and public input;

·         what was being done to ensure the database was being updated?;

·         hoped to see a significant improvement of the service in six months;

·         there had been lots of doubling-up with reporting of missed bins;

·         thanked the Council’s Customer Service Centre (CSC) who had experienced a high volume of calls regarding missed collections;

·         had a lot of sympathy for the binmen who had experienced abuse as well as the Council’s CSC;

·         management at Suez had not helped the situation;

·         the Council policies needed to be fit for purpose and regularly monitored;

·         Full Council should consider the report; and

·         the Policy and Resources Committee should also consider the report given there were financial implications.

Councillor Hannah Perkin moved the following amendment to recommendation (13) that the additional sentence be included:  That the Member Development Working Group be asked to provide on-going training on Scrutiny as a governance mechanism in the Committee system.  This was seconded by Councillor Ashley Wise.  On being put to the vote the motion was agreed by Members.

In response to points raised, the Head of Environment & Leisure confirmed that officers had engaged with other clients of Suez.  He thanked members of the working group for their input, and that officers would store relevant documents for the length of the contract.  The Head of Environment & Leisure considered that the recommendations were sensible and would assist both SBC and the contractors. 

The Head of Environment & Leisure explained that no waste contract ever managed 100% due to the nature of the work, but he was confident that the contract was not far from normal service and the Council could start to look forwards to some of the services improvements detailed at tender.  He said that as the service ‘settled’ the working group would continue to scrutinise the contract and the Committee would receive regular updates.  He acknowledged that the database was the route to resolving most of the issues and assured Members that the team were working really hard to build the database.  The Head of Environment & Leisure also spoke about new government legislation on waste collection which the Committee would need to consider.

The Policy & Engagement Officer reported that the scrutiny report and updated recommendations were on the Council’s website and a link to both would be sent to all Parish and Town Councils and the Area Committees.  Hard copies would be provided for those residents that did not have access to a computer.

Councillor Carole Jackson moved the following amendment:  That a waste contract update report will be considered twice a year by the Environment and Climate Change Committee with the first one in July 2025.

This was seconded by Councillor Dolley Wooster.  On being put to the vote the amendment was agreed.

The Environmental Services Manager reported that waste drivers and crews were involved with the re-routing and Suez had engaged with their drivers about the viability of routes.

Councillor Hannah Perkin moved the following motion:  That the Waste and Street Cleansing Contract Scrutiny Review Report be considered by Full Council.  This was seconded by Councillor Julien Speed.  On being put to the vote the motion was agreed.

Councillor Hannah Perkin proposed the recommendations, which were seconded by Councillor Charlie Miller.

The Chair thanked the Policy & Engagement Officer, the Head of Environment & Leisure, and the Environmental Services Manager for attending the meeting.

Resolved:

(1)          That the content of the Waste and Street Cleansing Scrutiny Review report be noted.

(2)          That the conclusions and recommendations proposed by the Waste and Street Cleansing Scrutiny Review Member Panel as set out in Appendix I, subject to the amendment to recommendation (13) as minuted.

(3)          That a waste contract update report will be considered twice a year by the Environment and Climate Change Committee with the first one in July 2025.

(4)          That the Waste and Street Cleansing Contract Scrutiny Review Report be considered by Full Council. 

Post-Meeting note

As the Committee had taken the decision to approve the scrutiny recommendations, the Council was bound by that decision under the Council’s Constitution.  However, to support the motion the decision of the committee would be reported to council by way of the minute of this meeting, for noting rather than the full report.