Agenda and draft minutes

There were two changes of membership for this meeting; Councillor Clarke-Taylor replaced Councillor Kloss and Councillor Ahmed replaced Councillor Osborn.

Councillor Bell, a signatory to the call-in, also sent his apologies.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The following decision taken by Cabinet on 8 July 2024 has been called in:

Fortnightly recycling proposal and supporting policies

The reasons for call-in, signed by 3 members, is as follows –

1. Lack of consultation with residents

2. Insufficient exploration of alternative cost-saving measures

3. Lack of detailed understanding of the broader impact

Full reasons are included in the attached documentation.

The following documents are attached –

(a) Proforma requesting the call-in of the decision signed by Councillors Khan, Bell and Ezeifedi received 15 July 2024

(b) Call-in procedures to be followed

(c) Extract of the minutes of Cabinet on 8 July 2024

(d) Report to Cabinet

(e) Appendix 1 to the report - Recycling frequencies (Herts Waste Partnership and neighbouring authorities)

(f) Appendix 2 to the report - Timeline – Simpler recycling and key contract dates

(g) Appendix 3 to the report - Housing trajectory

(h) Appendix 4 to the report -WRAP Recycling tracker survey

(i) Appendix 5 to the report - Options appraisal

(j) Appendix 6 to the report - Recycling project equality impact assessment

(k) Appendix 7 to the report - Communication and stakeholder management plan

(l) Appendix 8 to the report - Policy decisions presentation

(m) Appendix 9 to the report - 2024 Service change supporting policies

The Cabinet decision taken on 8 July 2024, minute reference 16, regarding the fortnightly recycling proposal and supporting policies, had been called in by Councillors Khan, Bell and Ezeifedi.  The reason for the call-in had been included in the agenda.  The committee had received a copy of the report and appendices to Cabinet, the minutes from Cabinet’s meeting, the completed call-in request and the call-in procedures.

The Associate Director of Planning, Infrastructure and Economy was asked to introduce the item. He explained that when a key decision was made, the decision could not be implemented until the call-in period had expired or the call-in process was complete. This item was to review the decision and the reasons for call-in within agenda packs. The committee would hear from all parties and ask questions and at the end had to decide to ratify the decision or to refer it back to Cabinet.

Councillor Khan was invited to present the reasons for calling in Cabinet’s decision.

Councillor Khan explained that, firstly, he felt that there had been a lack of adequate consultation with residents to enable the policy to be implemented correctly. This lack of engagement meant the council had insufficient feedback to determine its impact, particularly on larger families and those living in higher density areas.  Secondly, the decision had been taken to save money but there had been no comprehensive review of alternative cost-saving measures which would have a lower impact on a wider range of residents and would be less disruptive. Finally, there had been no detailed analysis of the impact on other services. The policy could result in an increase in litter, improperly stored waste, and addressing these would undermine any savings and have detrimental environmental implications.

The committee were invited to ask Councillor Khan any questions.

Councillor Khan was asked where he would find the necessary savings. He referred to Labour’s alternative budget which contained measures including efficiency savings, digitalisation of the council’s magazine and removal of the Political Assistant post which would provide annual savings of £138K.

The committee noted the equalities impact assessment that had been provided and asked what further information was needed to assess the impact. Councillor Khan advised that he wanted to focus on certain areas where residents already struggled to store the number of bins required and he noted the impact on pedestrians. Larger families had higher outputs and he also expressed concern about litter and fly-tipping.

It was noted that the government was bringing in service changes required by 2026, the committee asked about the risk of incurring further costs in the service. Councillor Khan stated that Watford was performing well in recycling and this would be a retrograde step.

Members discussed the nature of fly-tipped waste and whether it constituted recyclables or other waste, such as from construction. Councillor Khan’s concern was that more waste would be left out and the council would incur the cost of removal; a more proactive approach would be needed.

It was noted that some  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.