Issue - meetings

To endorse the procurement approach outlined and delegate authority to the Head of Community Services in consultation with the Head of Finance and Asset Management, Director: One Legal and the Lead Member for Clean and Green Environment to proceed with the procurement as outlined within the report.

1.      That the procurement approach outlined in the report be ENDORSED.

2.      That authority be delegated to the Head of Community Services, in consultation with the Head of Finance and Asset Management, the Director: One Legal and the Lead Member for Clean and Green Environment, to proceed with the procurement for fleet replacement as outlined within the report.  

98.1           The report of the Waste Contracts Manager, circulated at Pages No. 29-50, considered the options available to the Council, taking into account budgetary constraints, for the most appropriate way forward for the fleet replacement. The report set out five options and it was proposed that a hybrid of those options be progressed. Members were asked to endorse the procurement approach and to delegate authority to the Head of Community Services, in consultation with the Head of Finance and Asset Management, the Director of One Legal and the Lead Member for Clean and Green Environment to proceed with the procurement for fleet replacement.

98.2           The Head of Community Services explained that the waste vehicle fleet was due to be replaced by April 2024. The government was currently looking to introduce legislation in three areas which would impact local authority waste collections. The official position was that the large scale changes being considered would be mandatory, funded where necessary from national new burdens funding and would need to be in place for 2024; however, timescales were likely to slip as the detailed consultation responses for two of the elements had not yet been published by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). In addition, due to changes in government, and a move towards cost saving, it was not clear if the anticipated level of funding would still be available for new burdens or if elements of the proposals would be watered down. The three areas were Extended Producer Responsibility – this looked to move all life cycle costs for handling and reprocessing packaging to the producer of the packaging; Deposit Return Scheme – an additional charge levied on individual drinks cans and bottles to be refunded to the consumer when those containers were returned; and Consistency of Collections – proposed several mandatory changes such as separate food waste collections for all households, source segregated recycling and free garden waste collections for all households. Unfortunately, this meant the Council was not purchasing its fleet at the best time so it was proposed that the purchase of six recycling vehicles be held back until 2025 when there was more clarity. The biggest risk was a mandatory change of service to a source separated collection – if imposed this may require a twin stream system such as keeping paper and card separate from the remaining recycling rather than full separation but this was yet to be decided and was the reason it made sense to delay the purchase of the recycling vehicles for a year.

98.3           The main procurement exercise would be led by Ubico’s fleet team and overseen by the Head of Fleet Operations as they had the detailed expertise on vehicle specifications required. There was a wish to replace like for like with the inclusion of euro six engines; inclusion of bin lifts and use of HV oil which was better for the environment. A full electric fleet was not an option as the technology was not quite ready and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98