Agenda item

To consider the progress made by the Working Group during 2021/22; to agree that the Working Group continue to meet until Ubico contract renewal in 2027 with the revised Terms of Reference as set out at Appendix 1 to the report; and to agree that Officers explore the mechanism for requesting additional capital funding for an additional waste vehicle, and develop a business case for adding the provision of a new waste collection depot to the Infrastructure List to enable Community Infrastructure Levy funding to be used, and report back to the Executive Committee. 

103.1        Attention was drawn to the report of the Head of Community Services, circulated at Pages No. 36-43, which asked Members to consider the progress made by the Depot Services Working Group during 2021/22; to agree that the Depot Services Working Group continue to meet until Ubico contract renewal in 2027 with the revised Terms of Reference as set out at Appendix 1 to the report; and to agree that Officers explore the mechanism for requesting additional capital funding for an additional waste vehicle, and develop a business case for adding the provision of a new waste collection depot to the Infrastructure List to enable Community Infrastructure Levy funding to be used, and to report back to the Executive Committee.

103.2        The Head of Community Services indicated that, from an Officer perspective, the Working Group had worked really well during the year, despite being impacted by COVID at the start, with meetings being held remotely.  In terms of the recommendations, he would welcome a decision which would enable the Working Group to continue for the next five years due to the long-term nature of a number of projects underway such as trade waste, the depot and in-cab technology/connected workforce.  The Chair of the Working Group, the Lead Member for Clean and Green Environment, wished to thank Members of the Working Group who had kept track of a range of projects, as well as routine work, over the course of the year with good progress being made.  He made particular reference to the project to identify a new depot site being carried out with Cheltenham Borough Council which would help to protect Tewkesbury Borough Council as its waste service expanded in the future, the in-cab technology/connected workforce project and the street cleansing review.  Standing Agenda items included financial and performance reports from Ubico as well as updates on the grounds maintenance service which had improved considerably since the Working Group had been established.  He was particularly pleased to see the recommendation to explore the mechanism for requesting capital funding for an additional waste vehicle and to develop a business case for adding the provision of a new waste collection depot to the Infrastructure List to enable Community Infrastructure Levy funding to be used and he hoped that the Committee would be supportive of this.

103.3        A Member expressed the view that the recommendation around investigating the potential for using Section 106/Community Infrastructure Levy funding to support the waste service was a very sensible way forward.  With regard to the trade waste project, a Member noted that a trial was due to begin in quarter one of 2022/23 and he asked if that had started.  In response, the Head of Community Services confirmed it was currently on schedule to start during the quarter.  In relation to grass cutting, a Member recognised this had been an ongoing issue for a number of years; she noted that checks were being carried out quarterly and she asked how these were actually done.  The Head of Community Services explained that the Working Group had set certain standards for grass cutting which was graded A-D and an Officer undertook a physical check to compare the cut against the standards.  Ubico had recently changed the way it operated its grass cutting service; this had been working well so far but reports would be taken back to the Working Group to assess the overall quality throughout the course of the year.  A Member queried whether the grass cutting standards were complicated by wildflowers and pollinated patches and the Head of Community Services indicated that, provided there was good communication with the Parish Councils this could be accommodated.  Another Member had learnt from the Grange Field project that wildflower meadows were quite complex, for instance, whilst they did not have to be cut as often, the cuttings had to be removed otherwise they enriched the soil too much.  A Member asked whether consideration had been given to investing in technology to assist with the inspection of grass cutting in order to free up Officer time and the Head of Community Services confirmed this was part of the connected workforce project.  With regard to grass cutting, the Head of Community Services indicated that Members would be interested to note that, in terms of the maintenance of land on behalf of Gloucestershire County Council, the Working Group had recently agreed to the areas which would be cut twice per year on a trial basis; however, the County Council had suggested it may be willing to increase the financial contribution to the Borough Council in order for the land to be cut more regularly, therefore, the trial was currently on hold.

103.4        A Member queried whether the street cleansing review included road sweeping and if a second road sweeper had been secured.  In response, the Head of Community Services confirmed that road sweeping was included and he undertook to follow up the query on the road sweeper and come back to Members following the meeting.

103.5        A Member questioned whether the Working Group should have more of a focus, for instance, two projects which were time bound with specific business cases which could be delivered within a shorter timeframe of two or three years rather than the Working Group continuing until 2027 during which time it would potentially be looking mainly at updates.  His understanding of a Working Group was that it should be task and finish with a clear scope of work but the Terms of Reference seemed to include a lot of items for monitoring.  He indicated that, based on the quarterly performance reports received by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the KPIs for the waste service seemed to suggest there were very few concerns - none of the 11 KPIs which had not been achieved in the most recent report related to depot services - as such, he questioned whether there was a need for a dedicated Working Group in this area.  The Head of Community Services explained that the Working Group had originally been set-up with a wide remit to look at any aspect of the Ubico contract and that could change throughout the year, for example, if grass cutting performance began to drop dramatically, the Working Group would want to investigate.  He felt that limiting the scope to two projects would be less productive as the majority of projects were very long-term and expected to run until 2027/28 – the depot project had been running for the last two years and it was only at the last meeting of the Working Group that there had been something meaningful to report.  The Member continued to be of the view that a Working Group should have a particular focus rather than dipping in and out of different projects.  The Head of Community Services indicated that he would be guided by the Committee in terms of how, and if, the Working Group continued to operate.  The Chair of the Depot Services Working Group explained that the nature of the waste service meant that things could change in an instant – the service might be running perfectly but a change of crew or management could suddenly trigger a chain of events which meant that it started to fall apart.  The waste service cost taxpayers £4m per year therefore it needed to operate effectively and the Working Group was a mechanism for getting back on track if things started to go wrong.  A Member pointed out that, prior to the Working Group being established, Ubico had been a particular issue which was regularly discussed by the Committee and, in her view, it was essential for the Committee to continue to have an overview of the waste service via the Working Group for the reasons stated by the Chair of the Working Group.  Another Member indicated that the point being made was that the purpose of the Working Group should be to focus on a clearly defined task and to report back on that, as opposed to being there in case anything went wrong.

103.6        The Chief Executive advised that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had a remit to look at any service across the Council but it had the ability to focus down on certain areas via Working Groups.  As some of the Council’s services and projects were larger and more complex, this could require input from Members with a detailed understanding of the service and the issues at play.  Waste was a flagship service for the Council, as well as being its most expensive, so he felt it was probably right and proper to have a dedicated Depot Services Working Group with a wide remit.  The Working Group had originally been borne out of concerns about grass cutting and grounds maintenance which had required a lot of Officer and Member input to resolve at the time.  His personal view was that the Working Group had an important role to play in terms of delivering projects and monitoring other aspects of the Ubico contract which may be on track currently but could become an issue.

103.7        A Member asked if there was any way to thank Ubico when they had done a good job as she had recently spoken to an operative cutting grass in the Bishop’s Cleeve cemetery who had shown real care and consideration for what he was doing and had gone the extra mile by giving her a tour.  The Chair of the Depot Services Working Group advised that he regularly thanked Ubico for the work carried out and would be happy to pass on the Member’s comment.  He recognised that staff had continued to do their jobs throughout COVID and he agreed they often went above and beyond.

103.8        It was

RESOLVED          1. That the progress made by the Depot Services Working Group during 2021/22 be NOTED.

2. That it be AGREED that the Depot Services Working Group continue to meet until Ubico contract renewal in 2027 with the revised Terms of Reference as set out at Appendix 1 to the report.

3. That it be AGREED that Officers explore the mechanism for requesting additional capital funding for an additional waste vehicle, and develop a business case for adding the provision of a new waste collection depot to the Infrastructure List to enable Community Infrastructure Levy funding to be used, and report back to the Executive Committee.