To consider a request from Ubico to expand the Council’s proposed vehicle fleet outside the approved budgetary framework and the revenue implications for the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan.

That, having considered the options contained within the report and Ubico’s associated business case, it be RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that the ongoing increase to the revenue budget to fund Ubico’s provision of a part-time driver and part-time loader to service their request for an additional refuse collection vehicle (Option 5 within the Ubico Business Case) be APPROVED.

66.1           It was noted that, as a Director of Ubico, the Chief Executive had declared an interest in this item of business and had left the meeting for its consideration.

66.2           The report of the Interim Head of Community Services, circulated separately at Pages No. 1-10, asked Members to consider a request from Ubico to expand the Council’s proposed vehicle fleet outside the approved budgetary framework; the capital costs of the vehicle could be met within the approved budget but the revenue implications for crewing, running, maintaining and replacing an additional vehicle would be outside of the approved budget and would have an impact on the Medium Term Financial Strategy. Members were asked to consider the proposed options available, as set out within the report, and to recommend to Council that the revenue budget be increased on an ongoing basis to fund Ubico’s provision of a part-time driver and part-time loader to service its request for an additional refuse vehicle.

66.3           The Interim Head of Community Services explained that, latterly during the vehicle fleet procurement process, Ubico had undertaken round reviews to ensure operational effectiveness and compliance with health and safety regulations etc. During that process, it had come to light that an additional vehicle was required in order that long reversing manoeuvres in narrow lanes could be avoided, as could the use of the street cleansing vehicle to carry out such rounds which put pressure on that vehicle and crew to undertake both duties. Ubico had been trying to avoid the extra expenses associated with the provision of an additional vehicle but, ultimately, it had been decided that the purchase of a new vehicle with a part-time driver and loader was the most cost effective way to address the issues faced; the business case for this was set out at Appendix 1 to the report.

66.4           The reason for the urgency of the decision was that Ubico was currently in the midst of its route scheduling work and this was time sensitive as residents needed to be made aware of changes to collection rounds as soon as possible. In terms of revenue generation, there would be some spare capacity on the vehicle so it was suggested that there may be potential to generate revenue income of approximately £15,000 by hiring the vehicle out to other contracts; this had been deducted from the revenue costs to offset the full amount required to fund the expansion of the service, however, there was a risk that this target income may not be achieved as it relied on unquantifiable business opportunities and uncertain service demand which could therefore result in increased costs.

66.5           During the discussion which ensued, a Member questioned why the vehicle fleet was not purchased between all members of Ubico. In response, the Committee was advised that the new vehicle would be used for both refuse and recycling collection, as well as garden waste, if the residents in question qualified for that service. There were approximately 600 properties that would be served by the new vehicle and it was not currently known whether any of the partner authorities within Ubico had the same need for that size vehicle. The other partner authorities were also looking at rounds etc. but they would not be able to commit, in a timely fashion, to whether or not they would have a use for the new vehicle.  In terms of there being one collection service for all Ubico partners, this was an aspiration for the Joint Waste Committee but not something that was likely to be implemented in the very near future. Health and Safety Executive guidance was that if long reversing manoeuvres could be avoided they should be and, as the rounds were being considered anyway, it was reasonably practicable to address this through the procurement of a new vehicle. In addition, the Borough Solicitor indicated that the Council needed to grasp the health and safety issue and, as Ubico had done the assessment, it was reasonable for the Council to consider it. The Ubico Contract Manager explained that Tewkesbury Borough was the only authority within Ubico that did not have a vehicle of this size in its fleet and, whilst the reason for this was historical, now seemed to be a good time to address it.

66.6           Members generally agreed that the health and safety imperatives outweighed any issues around the purchase of the vehicle but also recognised that the report was asking for revenue for the crew for the vehicle rather than for capital to purchase the vehicle. It was also felt that, to allow a full and frank discussion about the issues at Council, it would be better if the item was considered in confidential business. Accordingly, it was