Agenda item

Report of the Client Manager Waste, Recycling and Streetcare

Cabinet received a report from the Client Manager Waste, Recycling and Streetcare which explained that the council’s current contract for reprocessing its kerbside collected recyclable material was due to end in January 2017. 

Councillor Scudder introduced the report and explained that the recommendation was for the council to be part of aconsortium with three other Councils.  There had been four options.

§         a service contract – where the Herts Waste Partnership (HWP) simply sought a price for the processing of bulk dry recyclables with the relevant councils responsible for selling to end markets;

§         a design, build and operate contract – all 11 HWP authorities working together;

§         sub county contracts involving between 2-4 Partner Authorities;

§         a South West Herts Partnership formed out of those authorities keen to work together for a joint solution. 

Councillor Scudder explained that the option chosen was for the sub-county contract, combined with three other councils to go out to tender.  A company would then be chosen which came back with the best financial solution.  It would be an open tender so the current operator would be able to bid.

In response to a question from the Mayor, the Head of Corporate Strategy and Client Services stated that there were things the council had no control over for example, the international situation of an unpredicted drop in the price of oil.  This had meant that it was cheaper to make plastic from the virgin product than using recycled material and had therefore impacted upon the price.  Also the downturn in the Chinese economy.  The process of recycling material in the past might have been lucrative, but had changed to cost neutral and was now in a cost situation.  The council was required to do recycling and it benefited from recycling credits which were rewards for recycling and compensation for diverting rubbish from landfill.  This was income which offset some of the costs.  However, over the lifetime of the next contract the situation could change again.  The purpose of a combined tender looked at the optimum size of group to go to market and would have in place a financial model which would reward the council if the market changed and also gave some stability.

Councillor Scudder added that recycling credits and compensation from the county was considerably more than recycling gate fees.  The council would get more back than it spent.

In response to a question from Councillor Bell about when costs would be known, the Head of Corporate Strategy and Client Services explained that the consortium would go out to tender in accordance with the timetable in the report. Then the outcome would identify the costs associated with accepting the tender.  Until such time as the returns were received the quotes would not be known.

The Head of Corporate Strategy and Client Services also confirmed that the council’s client services contract team would monitor the contract once in place.

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

1. agrees to the Council being part of a consortium contract to be tendered in 2016 and commencing in 2017 for the future reprocessing of its commingled dry recycling material.
   
   
2. agrees to the associated bulk haulage requirement forming part of another tendering exercise alongside the reprocessing contract.