Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted from Jim Frewin and Gregor Murray.

Al Neal attended as a substitute.

Norman Jorgensen attended the meeting as one of the signatories, to present the Call-In.

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

To answer any public questions on items contained within this Agenda. A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for members of the public to ask questions submitted under notice. The Council welcomes questions from members of the public about the work of this Committee.

Subject to meeting certain timescales, questions can relate to general issues concerned with the work of the Committee or an item which is on the Agenda for this meeting.  For full details of the procedure for submitting questions please contact the Democratic Services Section on the numbers given below or go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/publicquestions

There were no public questions.

To answer any Member questions on items contained within this Agenda.

There were no Member questions.

To consider a report which gives details of the Call-In and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

The Committee considered a Call-In on a decision made by the Executive, at its meeting on 29 September 2022, relating to ending the supply of Food Waste Caddy Liners. The Call-In covering report stated that the Executive decision was:

“That the Executive agree ceasing the supply of caddy liners as alternatives are available”

Andrew Mickleburgh (in the Chair) explained the procedure to be followed at the meeting and the issues for Members to focus on. The Committee was tasked to review the Executive decision against the decision making principles set out in the Council’s Constitution, viz:

a)     proportionality (i.e. the action must be proportionate to the desired outcome);

b)     due consultation and the taking of professional advice from Officers;

c)     human rights will be respected and considered at an early stage in the decision making process;

d)     a presumption in favour of openness;

e)     clarity of aims and desired outcomes; and

f)      when decisions are taken by the Executive, details of the options which were taken into account and the reasons for the decision will be recorded.

Norman Jorgensen, one of the five Call-In signatories, presented the Call-In (supported by Pauline Jorgensen). Councillor Jorgensen addressed the Committee and made the following opening statement:

“The purpose of this call in is two-fold. Firstly to ensure decisions are made following the processes set out in the Council’s constitution and, secondly, to encourage good decision making.

On 29 September the Lib Dem Executive made the decision to cease the provision of food caddy liner bags. The Conservative Councillors who signed this call-in fear that if this decision is carried through it will act as a barrier to the use of the food waste recycling scheme and adversely impact the level of food waste recycled if some residents chose to discard food waste into the blue bags instead. This at a time when we wish to improve levels of recycling and reduce the volume of material discarded in the blue bags.

The Council has a target of increasing the use of the food waste service in 2022/23 by about 70%, which was not given due weight when making this decision. We feel the targeted 70% improvement has been placed in jeopardy by the decision to stop providing food caddy liners.

I will now go through the specific reasons for the call in.

1.     a) In breach of rule 1.4.2.a) proportionality, we believe the decision is not proportional to the desired outcome in that the savings attributed in the 2022/23 Medium Term Financial Plan to the targeted increase in food waste recycling of £350,000 would not be achieved if caddy liners are not provided. To give context, each tonne of food waste diverted from the blue bags results in a saving to the Council of £1,000 in disposal costs. As stated previously, we feel that removal of the provision of caddy liners will discourage use of the food recycling scheme. Our view on the likely reduction in food waste recycling resulting from this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

To consider a report which sets out the officer response to the Call-In.

Ian Shenton, Executive Member for Environment, Sport and Leisure, addressed the Committee in response to the Call-In.

Councillor Shenton stated the Executive had agreed to the food waste service in January 2018, with a commencement date in 2019. There was no intention to continue to supply caddy liners after the initial batch, which was funded through a one-off capital receipt. In 2020, the caddy liners were made available on request. Then, in 2021, they were supplied again to all households, funded from income from the garden waste scheme. No growth bid was submitted to formalise the funding arrangement. This came to a head in the summer of 2022 when it became clear that funding from other parts of the service was no longer viable.

It was clear that many other councils, which did not provide caddy liners, were able to achieve better performance than WBC. Caddy liners were not material to their high performance. The Executive decision did not constitute a significant change to the service as other materials could be used to line the food waste caddies, as set out in the Executive report. The weekly collection service would continue as normal. Consequently, there was no need to carry out a consultation on the new arrangement.

In the ensuing discussion, Members raised the following points and questions:

After the caddy liners were made available on request in 2020, who made the decision to recommence the supply to all households in 2021? It was confirmed that the decision was taken in consultation with the Executive Member. The decision was taken for the convenience of residents. It was not based on a reduction in performance of the service.

Was the decision to continue supplying the caddy liners without budget provision taken in public? Is there a record of the decision? It was confirmed that the decision was taken internally following discussions between officers and the Executive Member. There was no consultation on this decision.

Graham Ebers confirmed that there was no specific ongoing revenue provision for the caddy liners after the first year of operation. Funding from elsewhere in the service became problematic this year in the context of the financial challenges facing the Council.

If finalised, how will the impact of the decision to remove the caddy liners be monitored and reported? It was confirmed that there was monthly monitoring of the waste tonnages collected. The data would reveal any impact towards the end of the 2022/23 Municipal Year. In the meantime, officers were confident that food waste tonnages would increase and the overall £350k saving would be achieved.

In relation to the application of section 5.4.8 of the Constitution, Andrew Moulton commented that the Council’s legal obligations had been met in line with the relevant Access to Information requirements. It was accepted that not circulating the Executive Forward Plan to all Members amounted to a technical breach of the rules. This was seen as a “one-off” incident. It was confirmed that the Forward Plan could still be viewed on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

Ian Shenton summed up the response to the Call-In as follows. There was no specific budget for the food waste caddy liners. For a budget to be created there would have had to be a growth bid – which did not happen. The cost of the caddy liners has been met from elsewhere in the service budget. The food waste collection service will continue – there are other ways to line the food waste caddy. No other council provides a routine supply of caddy liners, yet they are able to outperform WBC. The caddy liners are not essential to the delivery of the service and ending their supply will save the current cost.

Norman Jorgensen summed up the Call-In as follows. The funding issue is set out in the Medium Term Financial Plan – diversion of food waste from blue bags to caddies. A public consultation took place last year on recycling. A similar consultation should have taken place on the issue of caddy liners. Some of the reasons for the Call-In, e.g. proportionality were subject to a degree of subjectivity. However, the breach of section 5.4.8 of the Constitution was clear. That alone is justification for referring the matter back to the Executive. Greater notice to Members would have allowed more time for discussion and questioning. It was also clear, from comments in the media, that predetermination had taken place before the decision was made.

Having considered the Call-In and the response from the Executive Member, the Committee considered its decision.

Andrew Mickleburgh confirmed that the Committee could not overturn the Executive decision subject to the Call-In. If the Committee had concerns, it could refer the decision back to the Executive for further consideration with any recommendations the Committee agreed. Alternatively, the Committee could confirm the Executive decision.

It was proposed by Andy Croy and seconded by Adrian Mather that the Executive decision, relating to Food Waste Caddy Liners, be confirmed.

Upon being put to the vote it was:

RESOLVED: That the Executive decision, relating to Food Waste Caddy Liners, be confirmed.