BREAKING: Veolia to be awarded new integrated Brent Council Public Realm contract worth £137m over 8 years

 The first Brent Council Cabinet of 2023 will be requested to award the new  Integrated Easte Waste Collections and Winter Maintenance contract to Veolia:

[Approve] the award of the Integrated Contract to Veolia Environmental Services UK Ltd for an initial contract period of eight (8) years, with an option to extend for a further eight (8) year contract period in the estimated sum of £17.13m for 2023/24, circa £137m over the initial 8-year term of the contract or circa £274m over the full 16-year contract period.

The new contract introduces a twin stream recycling system of paper and card recycling in bags one week and remaining blue bin recycling in the next week.  There will also be a new small items collection service. Education and Communication on waste services will be provided in-house.

Frequency of street cleaning on a rota basis will be ended and instead there will be an 'intelligence led' response by a Task Force to respond to litter hot-spots.

The webcast of the Public Ream Scrutiny Committee meeting  that considered the issue can be viewed HERE.

The Committee had been concerned about the discrepancy  between the on-line consultation rejection of the changes and the acceptance of the changes in the much smaller face-to-face consultations. An officer had admitted that the street cleansing changes would not produce a better outcome but were made necessary by financial constraints. 

The Cabinet Report states

A report on the Integrated Contract procurement programme was considered by Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee at its meeting on 13 December 2022. The Committee's recommendations are included below and these will be taken forward by officers in early 2023.

i) Produce a diagram/flowchart detailing all milestones from May 2019 when the Redefining Local Services (RLS) programme was first initiated.
ii) Review household bulky waste collection charges, including consideration of a sliding scale of charges linked to the number of items to be collected, rather than the current fixed rate of £35 for up to five items.
iii) Undertake a feasibility study on the potential for introducing a mixed approach to paper/card recycling collections, to explore whether any recycling collection rounds in the borough would be more suited to the use of bins rather than sacks.
iv) Arrange a session with ward councillors and Neighbourhood Managers to inform the design and development of the new recycling engagement and communication plan that will accompany the roll out of the new recycling service. 
v) Liaise with the West London Waste Authority to ensure access is reinstated for pedestrians and cyclists at the Abbey Road Household Reuse and Recycling Centre.
vi) Improve collaboration between in-house enforcement teams and collection operatives in identifying fly tipping hot spots and collating evidence, to remove the burden from residents. 

You can judge for yourselves whether the final report to Cabinet takes the recommendations into account.

 I have embedded the full report below. Service changes can be found in 7.4 onwards (Twin Stream Recycling) and in 7.15 onwards ( Intelligence-led Street Cleansing).

 

Pinkham Way Alliance calls for support on ill-considered waste plan

 

The Pinkham Way Alliance, has launched the petition below calling on the North London Waste to abandon the current contract presently being negotiated.  Please sign, and distribute to friends and other networks in North London, urging them to sign.

 

Rest assured, that this development could impact financially on all council tax payers in all seven boroughs of North London. It does NOT only concern the Alexandra and Bounds Green Wards of Haringey.

 

North London waste contract negotiation should stop NOW

The Pinkham Way Alliance (PWA) initially fought crazy plans for a colossal waste plant – one of the biggest in Europe - in a residential area.  But we have since found profound flaws with North London Waste Authority’s (NLWA) whole waste strategy.  This should be fundamentally rethought now, otherwise ill-considered decisions will be implemented, and for 30 years North London taxpayers will pay over the odds, with corresponding cuts in services. Here’s why:

Non-competitive, poor value, potentially illegal

Only one bidder remains for each NLWA contract, for waste treatment and  the production of fuel pellets for incineration. When the original plans were abandoned, these contracts fundamentally changed. The procurements infringe Government rules, which stipulate three bidders, to ensure competition. Only huge multi-national operators were permitted to bid; smaller and perhaps more innovative UK companies were thus forced out. Lack of competition = poor value for money.

 

Over-long 30-year contracts

Based on inaccurate ‘upwards only’ waste predictions. If insufficient waste is produced, this ‘failure’ (NLWA words!) is paid for by the Councils (us).  Aren’t we supposed to be preventing/reducing waste and increasing recycling?

 

Inflexible strategy

The NLWA plans to build large plants immediately; these will not be able to adapt to changing technology. Waste has declined since 2006/7 and was flat before then. Habits and attitudes are changing; waste is seen as a resource and better processing methods constantly appear.

 

No accountability

The NLWA claims ‘partnership’ with its 7 member councils saying they ‘scrutinise’ its actions and strategy. We wrote to the councils about this. Most replies were virtually identical.  The councils confessed they’d been written ‘in consultation with the NLWA’, admitting they’ve ‘no formal ability to influence or scrutinise NLWA decisions’! 

 

Planning process not transparent

Trying to re-designate Pinkham Way as ‘industrial land’ to fit London Plan requirements; the distorting influence of NLWA requirements on the failed North London Waste Plan, highly questionable scoring/ criteria in site assessment, are some examples. NLWA secretly bought Pinkham Way outright (for £12m) – without planning permission. Last December it admitted it didn’t need it for the proposed use.

 

Conflict with Government policy

The Government has pledged, by 2050, an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions. Yet NLWA proposes manufacturing, for 30 years, fuel pellets in which waste plastic provides the main energy content. No disposal method emits more carbon. Furthermore, continuing development and increase in plastics recycling will probably reduce the guaranteed quality of the pellets (more financial risk for us).