Minutes:
7.1 The Corporate Manager – Waste Services, introduce the Report and detailed how the change of waste bin collection routes had been implemented. He advised Members that after the first week of the route changes, calls to the customer Service Centre had resume to normal levels.
7.2 In response to Councillor Welham’s question the Corporate Manager for Waste Services responded that lessons had been learnt for any future route changes. He added that the teams involved had work hard to ensure that the implementation of the new bin collection routes were executed as smoothly as possible.
7.3 Councillor Grandon thought that that the report had been clear and was well written. She had received no complaints from her ward despite that refuse collection days had changed.
7.4 Several Members suggested that recycling stickers or leaflets for recycling material were distributed to households again. However, the Corporate Manager for Waste Services explained that cost had to be considered in relation to the benefits achieved for such projects. He added that nationally recycling processes varied across authorities but that in Suffolk the recycling processes were consistent between authorities.
7.5 Councillor McCraw enquired if there was a method of feedback from the Waste Service collection crews, as waste collection in one street had been completely missed. The Corporate Manager for Waste Services responded that SERCO collected and managed feed-back from the Waste Collection Service Teams and provided data sets of collections to the Councils.
7.6 Members discussed the method for logging missed bin collections and how the Call System was collecting data. Suggestions were made for a call-back to customers, who had been unable to get through to the call-centre.
7.7 Members also queried if the vehicles were fit for purpose and if extra vehicles and crews had been used during the route changing period, which was confirmed by the officer.
7.8 Councillor Mansel thought that there had been a missed opportunity for informing resident of how to recycle, as 65,000 residents had received a leaflet regarding route changes. She sought that recycling information could have been included in this despatch.
7.9 The Corporate Manager for Waste Services explained that it had been considered to send a leaflet to all residents, however it had been decided that the benefit of sending information to all 84,000 residents was outweighed by cost of the distribution.
7.10 Councillor Adrian Osborne stated that contaminated recycling bins were an issue in Sudbury and that the Waste Collection Service collection teams dealt with these issues well.
7.11 Councillor Muller queried several issues including that the residents had no confidence that the content of the recycling bins was recycled as some crews had collected recycling waste in the refuse collections.
7.12 It was clarified that collection crews had not been encouraged to tip recycling waste into the refused collections, and that this would be discussed with SERCO.
7.13 Councillor Caston felt that there had not been a huge disruption and that it should be remembered that the route changes had been to improve the efficiency of resources by shortening routes and distances to the waste collecting centres.
7.14 Councillor Jan Osborne – Cabinet Member for Housing asked that consideration be provided at the planning stage for new developments as access for the bin collection vehicles was hindered by narrow lanes and restricted access.
7.15 The Corporate Manager for Waste Services informed Members that all new planning applications were considered by the Waste Collection Service team.
7.16 Councillor Malvisi added that many elderly people live in rural areas, some of whom would have difficulties in organising bins for collection. She thought that new housing developments should take such issues into consideration.
7.17 Councillor Scarff enquired if the direct costs of the route change were covered by SERCO and if any indirect costs would be included in the normal charges for SERCO. He asked if penalty fees for items such as missed bin collections, would be incorporated in the new SERCO contract.
7.18 The Corporate Manager clarified that penalties fees were included in the new SERCO contract, but that any future route changes would not incur further charges.
7.19 Councillor Fleming commented that she did not agree with the risk factor in paragraph 7.1 in the report as a ‘high probability’ since mitigation was already underway and the new MERF recycling plant would be able to alleviate any risks.
7.20 Councillor McCraw stated that the risk factor in paragraph 7.1 detailed what the risk would be if the waste collection routes had not been changed.
7.21 Councillor Muller suggested that an article regarding waste should be include in Parish Magazines to encourage recycling.
7.22 Members discussed the recommendation and agreed that thanks should be extended to the Waste Collation Service team and that lessons learnt should be forwarded to the Senior Leadership Team for any future waste collection route changes.
It was RESOLVED:
1.1 That the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee extend thanks for the report.
1.2 That the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee commend the Waste Collection Service Team on the successful introduction of the new Bin Collection Routes.
1.3 That the points learnt during the implementation of the new Bin
Collection Routes be forwarded to the Senior Leadership Team for consideration in future similar projects.
Supporting documents: