Issue - meetings

Surrey County Council (SCC) needs to make cost reductions of £104 million in 2017/18 and further cost reductions of £137 million in 2018/19 and 2019/20. The Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) identifies that the waste service has the potential to save £12.4 million including £3.3 million from the operation of the Community Recycling Centre (CRC) service in the period 2016/17 to 2018/19.

Changes to the CRC service that were implemented during 2016/17 will achieve an estimated £1.4million of cost reductions in a full year. This means further cost reductions need to be found to meet the MTFP target. The waste service has identified a plan where further efficiency could be achieved at CRCs. A public consultation was carried out between 23 June 2017 and 7 August 2017 seeking the views of residents and stakeholders on a set of potential options, as set out in paragraphs 12 to 16. A number of key stakeholders have been consulted including, Surrey MP’s, County Councillors, district & borough councils and parish & town councils.

CRCs are one of the most highly rated services provided by SCC with 77 % of users stating that they are satisfied or very satisfied with the service. The proposals are the latest in a series of measures designed to make CRCs more efficient and better value for money by focussing on their key purpose: to handle household waste that the Council has to take free of charge and that cannot be collected from the kerbside. If implemented the proposals would still maintain a comprehensive service that is highly valued by residents, which supports the strategic aims of increasing recycling and reducing landfill and meets legal requirements as a Waste Disposal Authority.

The Council would like to thank over 13,500 residents, who gave their opinion on the proposals in the consultation including their concerns with permanent CRC closures. Having listened to these views and taken into consideration the factors above, this report recommends implementing changes that will:

• Avoid the need to permanently close any of Surrey’s CRC’s.
• Reduce costs and improve efficiencies.
• Retain a comprehensive service focussing on the key purpose of the facilities, but with a reduction in weekday opening at a number of CRC sites when those sites are less well used.

In a full year these efficiency measures could deliver estimated savings of £1.08 - £1.56 million. The earliest any measures could be implemented is from December 2017, apart from weekday closures which would be implemented from January 2018 due to operational reasons. This would mean an expected shortfall against the MTFP of £0.92m to £1.06m (part year impact) in 2017/18 and £0.34m to £0.82m in 2018/19 (full year impact). The service will need to continue to find further efficiencies to meet this shortfall.

RESOLVED:

The Cabinet agreed that:

Reasons for decisions

At present there is spare capacity at the CRC network because of a reduction in throughput due to the previous changes. An adequate service can be retained if the above additional efficiency measures are implemented that will achieve an estimated cost reduction in a full year of £1.08 - £1.56 million. Table 3 in paragraph 43 gives a breakdown by efficiency measure. These recommendations take note of the views expressed in the public consultation and, the impact to the public (including those with protected characteristics) and the environment. If these recommendations are introduced it will reduce costs and provide better value for money for the Surrey taxpayer, whilst still maintaining a comprehensive service that supports the strategic aims of increasing recycling and reducing landfill, and meets its legal requirements as a Waste Disposal Authority.

[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee]

The Cabinet received a statement from Mr Jonathan Essex, Local Member for Redhill East. In his statement, Mr Essex made the following observations:

·         The Member welcomed  that the recommendations contained within the report did not propose closure of any of Surrey’s CRCS stating that this demonstrated the Cabinet had listened to some of the concerns of residents as expressed during the public consultation. Mr Essex did, however, articulate his concerns about the potential implications of reducing the opening hours of CRCs suggesting that it could increase instances of flytipping in the county and could discourage residents from recycling.

·         'He stressed that in line with supporting the amended motion at the council meeting that SCC had committed to investigate further options to improve the recycling service and that increasing recycling to meet our recycling target instead would save 5-6 million pounds, as confirmed by officers at the recent Environment and Infrastructure Select Committee. SCC should look to accelerate improvement of recycling rates across Surrey to exceed our 70 per cent target through 'invest to save' measures as an alternative to the current proposals. Also investing in new recycling (as opposed to energy from waste) infrastructure would give SCC an added incentive to raise recycling rates.

The Cabinet received a statement from Mr Stephen Cooksey, Local Member for Dorking South and the Holmwoods. Mr Cooksey made the following points in his statement:

·         The Member stated that CRCs had been one of SCC’s few success stories over recent years by deterring flytipping and enhancing recycling rates. The package of extended closure times and removal of the free daily allowance of chargeable waste proposed within the report would make it more difficult for people to recycle and, as a result, could lead to more flytipping and less recycling.

·         Attention was drawn to the 13,000 responses submitted during the public consultation which Mr Cooksey used to highlight the strength of feeling that existed among Surrey residents about the importance of CRCs.

·         Particular concerns were expressed about Dorking CRC which, if the recommendations were agreed, would be closed four days a week. The Member suggested that Cabinet Members from the Mole Valley area should oppose the recommendations based on that fact alone.

·         Mr Cooksey criticised the lack of clarity in the report stressing that projections had not been provided on flytipping, recycling rates or the potential revenue arising from the sale of recycled goods.

·         Finally, the Member suggested that removal of the free daily allowance could be open to legal challenge and that this should be investigated in more detail by the Council.

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport, Mr Mike Goodman, introduced the report and highlighting that the public consultation was fundamental in shaping the future of CRCs and that no decision had be taken on them prior to the  consultation taking place. Mr Goodman thanked all of the residents and stakeholders who had taken part in the consultation. The Cabinet Member stated that the consultation process had also encompassed discussions with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 149