Venue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Huma Younis
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
Apologies were received from Nikki Barton, Natalie Bramhall, Pat Frost, Peter Hickman, David Goodwin and Victoria Young.
· Colin Kemp and Rachael Lake substituted for Natalie Bramhall and Pat Frost.
· Ian Beardsmore substituted for David Goodwin.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
· In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest.
· Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests.
· Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register.
· Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest.
There were none.
Purpose of the report: Scrutiny of Services and Budgets
To scrutinise the amendment to waste contract to deliver the Waste Strategy, approved by the Cabinet on 28 April 2015.
Declarations of interest: None.
Witnesses invited by call-in Members:
Members and officers in attendance:
Mike Goodman, Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning
Trevor Pugh, Strategic Director for Environment and Infrastructure
Sheila Little, Director of Finance
Ann Charlton, Director of Legal and Democratic Services
Tony Orzieri, Finance Manager
Richard Parkinson, Waste Operations Group Manager
Nick Prior, Deloitte
Simon Martin, Mott MacDonald
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. Stephen Cooksey and Ian Beardsmore introduced the grounds for Call in.
2. Concern was raised by the Call In Members about Condition 6 and 7 of Resolution 1 of the July 2013 Cabinet decision, which dealt with value for money and DEFRA requirements, as set out in pages 7 – 11 of the agenda pack.
3. Attention was brought to Resolution 2 of the Cabinet report, where it was stated that the assessment of the Director of Finance was that the cost of proceeding with the Waste Strategy, including the Eco Park, met the value for money criterion and was the most affordable option available to the Council. An explanation was requested on the increased cost of proceeding with the waste strategy from £74m to £91m
4. The Call In Members drew attention to page 18 of the agenda pack, where two options were detailed. It was considered that given the increased cost of delivering the waste strategy as planned, other options should be explored.
The witnesses were called up to speak. A summary of their key points can be found below. A full version of their representations can be found on the webcast of the meeting: http://www.surreycc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/176868
1. The main challenge was around the value for money assessment.
2. Mr Crews felt that the Deloitte value for money assessment did not take into account qualitative consequences, such as possible failure of the plant.
3. It was Mr Crews’ view that the Cabinet had been misled, as they were only presented with present net value and not actual cash value.
4. Mr Crews referred to the costs being quoted without estimates or prediction intervals (i.e. +/- £10m).
5. The assessment provided by Mott MacDonald was, in Mr Crews’ opinion, not fit for purpose based on the lack of options analysis and comparative work.
1. The decision subject to the Call In was taken on 28 April 2015. Mr Francis referred to the report of the Leader on the Council’s budget and the reference to the great importance placed on climate change and reducing carbon emissions.
2. Mr Francis stated that gasifier technology had been shown to be very inefficient and contrary to the waste strategy.
3. The application for the Eco Park had not presented an R1 (Energy Recovery) calculation.
4. Support was given to the Call In Members suggestion that alternative options should be explored.
5. Mr Francis claimed that the Eco Park, as presented, would not be eligible to receive ROCs (Renewable Obligations ... view the full minutes text for item 33/15
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Committee will be held at 10.30am on 11 June 2015.
The next meeting will be held on 11 June 2015 at 10.30am in the Ashcombe, County Hall.