Agenda item

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 decision was confirmed by the Leader of the Council on 22 September 2022 in the Reading Chronicle where he said that whilst the volume of recycling could dip slightly it will come back because people want to recycle.

1.     b) In breach of rule 1.4.2.b) due consultation, no public consultation was undertaken on the proposed removal of the service and no alternatives were considered as shown in the decision sheet for the 29 September Executive meeting. Also, before the paper was considered by the Executive, the Leader of the Council stated in the Reading Chronicle on 22 September, that “It will be debated at the Council meeting on Thursday, but this is just to ratify it and the decision has been taken”. This is a clear case of predetermination in breach of rule 1.4.2.d) a presumption in favour of openness.

2.     Rule 5.4.8. requires that any key decision is to be advertised on the Forward Programme of the Executive at least 28 days before a key decision is made. It also says that “Each month a copy will be provided to all Members” (that is, a copy of the Forward Programme listing the key decisions to be made by the Executive). This latter requirement was not met, so Members did not have adequate foresight of upcoming business of the Executive.

We have presented four instances where the decision to cease supplying caddy liners has breached the rules of the Council’s decision making processes and so invite the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee to ask the Executive to look at this decision again, this time following the proper processes.”

Following Councillor Jorgensen’s statement, members of the Committee raised the following points and questions:

How significant was the risk to achieving the £350k saving in the MTFP? Councillor Jorgensen stated that there was a significant risk. There was a danger that residents would be put off recycling food waste if the caddy liners were not available. Although the potential use of other materials was noted, it would be a less convenient and messier process for residents.

Andy Croy queried the wording of the Call-In which referred to the Lib Dem/Labour coalition Executive. Councillor Croy confirmed that there were no Labour Members on the Executive.

In relation to proportionality, what were the desired outcomes relating to this decision? Councillor Jorgensen stated that it was important to focus on the overall environmental impact of the decision. So, for example, a proper consultation may have generated ideas about the use of recycled caddy bags. It was necessary to look at the potential cost saving against the overall impact on the amount of food waste recycled.

What evidence was there that the overall £350k savings target would not be achieved as a result of the decision? Councillor Jorgensen referred to the comments of the Leader in the Reading Chronicle, to the effect that the volume of recycling could dip slightly. It was also important to note that the new administration had made a commitment to more effective consultation with residents.

What were the financial implications of continuing to supply the food waste caddy liners? Councillor Jorgensen stated that supplying the caddy liners would help to achieve greater levels of food recycling. This would then deliver a greater saving, a saving which could be used to cover the costs of the liners. A proper consultation could also have generated more ideas leading to further increases in recycling and less contamination of the blue bags.

In relation to due consultation, many decisions were taken without public consultation. What was different about this decision? Councillor Jorgensen commented that this was a big decision which impacted on every household in the Borough.