Scrutiny Committee voted last night not to refer back the proposed variation of the Veolia contract. Conservative and Labour councillors outvoted their Liberal Democrat and Green peers.
The call-in by Liberal Democrats and a Green member wanted a review of Veolia performance before implementation of the variation measures, as the Lead Member, Cllr Promise Knight, had not consulted with councillors over the issue. As the Lead Member was not present Cllr Butt substituted for her.
Cllr Paul Lorber presented the call-in and began by challenging the sum of £1.54m quoted as the cost of the 12 month variation. It included 20% VAT. As public bodies spending for the public good do not pay VAT or have it returned - the true cost was actually £1.2m.
Before the implementation of the additional measures he said there should be a Review that asked:
What is wrong? {with waste and litter system]
How do we improve it?
How much does it cost?
What can we afford?
After Cllr Lorber and other councillors had spoken about the level of complaints from residents about litter and fly-tipping the Chair, Cllr A.Patel, drew attention to the 'disconnect' between that experience and a procurement report that said that Veolia was performing well and feedback was positive, satisfying the contract's KPIs (key Performance Indicators). Cllr Mary Mitchell remarked that perhaps this meant that the KPIs were wrong.
Cllr Butt said that the contract in 2023 was devised at a time when there was limited funding and even now councillors could not expect a gold-plated service. Veolia could not be expected to do things for free. The Council were plugging the gaps with the variation operating over 12 months and then could evaluate and decide what was possible over the next period. He seemed a little confused because at one point he said, 'This is not a variation of the contract'. (2.41 in above video)
Environment Officer Chris Whyte pointed on that the latest contract came to an end in 2031 and that for such a large and complicated contract a review involving all parties would start in 2028 ahead of the procurement.
Cllr Butt said that the interim measures would address Brent's 'dirty weekends' when littering and flytipping took place but was not addressed until work resumed on Monday. Weekend and late night working would deal with some of the persistent problems. Chris Whyte said that the clear-up from weekend dumping lasted through to Wednesday so it was only on Thursday and Friday that Brent streets were really clean.
Questioning by Cllr Paul Ryan on the money available this year drew the information that an additional £3m, minus the £1.2m, for public realm was available in this year's budget. Members could make suggestions on how this could be used but the process for doing so was not clear.
sadly Labour haven’t learnt any lessons following the local elections and the Tory support is allowing bad decisions to continue being made. I can’t wait for the next local elections! Labour have a habit of blaming everything on the budget but you can’t blame the budget for a cleansing contract with badly set KPI’s, and a contract which now needs more money as it is failing. Looking forward to a Lib-Dem, Green coalition in a few years time :)
ReplyDeleteHaving now listened carefully to the scrutiny debate and reviewed the contract itself, I think there is a risk of focusing on additional resources without first asking whether the standards already contained within the existing contract are being consistently achieved.
ReplyDeleteThe debate understandably focused on additional litter pickers, sweepers and weekend cleansing. Those measures may well help. However, the contract already requires locations to be restored to Grade A following cleansing, meaning no litter or refuse present, and then maintained at Grade B or above thereafter. How many readers can honestly say their local high street or town centre is consistently maintained to either of those standards?
The contract also requires Veolia to achieve those standards through an "intelligence-led and targeted deployment of resources". In other words, the contract specifies the standard. It is then for Veolia to determine and deploy the staffing, equipment and resources necessary to achieve it.
What struck me from the scrutiny discussion was that very little attention was given to how those standards are evidenced in practice. The contract covers far more than sweeping pavements. It includes planted areas, around tree bases, and around and under street furniture and signage, yet these are often the places where residents encounter bottles, cigarette ends, litter and detritus accumulating.
Additional investment may well be justified, particularly to address the weekend cleansing gap highlighted by officers.
However, before asking whether Brent needs more litter pickers, scrutiny should also be asking how the council satisfies itself that the standards Brent is already paying for are being consistently achieved and evidenced through inspections and contract management.
During the meeting several councillors highlighted the disconnect between residents' experience and reported KPI performance. For me, that is the more interesting question, and one that deserves much greater scrutiny.