Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: The Guildhall, St Peter's Place, Westgate, Canterbury. View directions

Contact: Josie Newman  01227 862 009 Email: democracy@canterbury.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

766.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Dixey, Todd and Williams.

767.

Substitute Councillors

Minutes:

Councillor B Baker was present as a substitute for Councillor Williams and Councillor Doyle was present as a substitute for Councillor Todd.

768.

Declaration of any interests

TO RECEIVE any declarations for the following in so far as they relate to the business for the meeting:-

 

  1. Disclosable Pecuniary Interests
  2. Other Significant Interests (what were previously thought of as non-pecuniary Prejudicial interests)
  3. Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests

 

Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests not required to be disclosed as DPI’s or OSI’s, ie announcements made for transparency reasons alone, such as:

·        Membership of outside bodies that have made representations on agenda items, or

·        Where a Councillor knows a person involved, but does not have a close association with that person, or

·        Where an item would affect the well-being of a Member, relative, close associate, employer, etc but not his/her financial position.

 

[Note: an effect on the financial position of a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc; OR an application made by a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc, would both probably constitute either an OSI or in some cases a DPI].

 

 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interests from committee members or officers.

769.

Public participation

Members of the public may speak on any item on the agenda, for a maximum of three minutes, provided that notification has been given to Democratic Services by 12.30pm on the working day before the meeting.

Minutes:

There was one public speaker for the meeting and they were heard before the consideration of the waste collection item.

770.

Waste collection and street cleansing - delivery options for 2021 pdf icon PDF 148 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Director of Commissioned Services.

 

The appendices will follow in a supplement to this agenda.

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED: That a Local Authority Trading Company be developed to manage the council’s waste and street cleansing services from January 2021.

 

Reason for the decision: A service managed by the Local Authority Trading Company would have greater flexibility and adaptability over the life of the contract than one managed by a traditional private sector contract without costing the council significantly more.

 

Minutes:

(A representative of the Council’s consultants, Ricardo, was present)

(Prior to the consideration of the item Councillor N Baker, Chairman of the Community Committee, spoke.)

The Director of Commissioned Services introduced the report, which considered the delivery options for the Council’s waste collection and street cleaning services from January 2021 when the current contract with Serco expires. The report set out the benefits and risks of both delivery through a Local Authority Trading Company and through the private sector.

The Committee debated the matters and the Director of Commissioned Services and the consultant gave points of clarification where necessary. Points including the following were covered:

 

  1. The option of bringing the service in-house had been dismissed because the terms and conditions the council would have to offer staff would cost more than if they weren’t being directly employed by the council.
  2. It was not the intention to pay the waste collection staff at the minimum wage because this would affect staff retention and so the quality of the service.
  3. Technology could bring the service some further efficiencies but within limits because it was largely a physical job. A council owned company would be in the best place to take advantage of new technologies as it could be more adaptable.
  4. The tendering of the service to the private sector in a combined arrangement with other councils would not yield much of a saving and would have the drawback of the contractor needing to answer to three councils along with the usual inflexibility of a contract with the private sector.
  5. It was assumed at this stage that a Local Authority Trading Company would use the council’s existing shared services arrangements for IT and Human Resources. However, more detailed work would need to be done to see if this was the right way forward.
  6. Serco also held the current grounds maintenance contract but this did not end until 2023. Whilst there may be benefits to bringing that service under the same arrangement it would need to be looked at further down the line.

 

The recommendation set out in the report was proposed, seconded and when put to a vote -

 

RESOLVED: That a Local Authority Trading Company be developed to manage the council’s waste and street cleansing services from January 2021.

 

Reason for the decision: A service managed by the Local Authority Trading Company would have greater flexibility and adaptability over the life of the contract than one managed by a traditional private sector contract without costing the council significantly more.

 

Record of the voting

For (10): Councillors B Baker, Bartley, A Cook, S Cook, Doyle, Glover, L Jones, Samper, A Taylor and Walker.

Against: None

Abstaining (1): Councillor Baldock

 

771.

Lorry parking within the District pdf icon PDF 83 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Director of Development

Decision:

 

RESOLVED: That officers are given authority to explore further with Swale Borough Council, Kent County Council and Highways England potential options for lorry parking within Swale district.

 

Reason for the decision: Overnight lorry parking in inappropriate areas can cause road safety problems, environmental issues as well as disruption and inconvenience to residents in the Canterbury district. If a suitable location for a lorry park can be found in the Swale Borough area then this could provide a good long term solution. This would need to be combined with appropriate enforcement measures such as zonal parking restrictions with clamping similar to the trial carried out by Ashford Borough Council.

Minutes:

The Chairman introduced the report which set out the situation in regard to illegal lorry parking in the district. Enforcement was inappropriate whilst there was no provision for legitimate lorry parking. Ashford Borough Council were able to enforce because they had suitable provision for legitimate lorry parking. Swale Borough Council were looking into the option of a lorry park close to the border with Canterbury.

He added that the private sector would not support such a facility as it would not be sufficiently profitable for them. A council funded lorry might be more viable as the councils could accept a lower profit level and it would be appropriate since it would proactively tackle an issue affecting residents.


The Committee discussed the matter and in particularly stressed the need for any such provision to be financially self-sufficient in the long term.

 

The recommendation set out in the report was proposed, seconded and when put to a vote -

 

RESOLVED: That officers are given authority to explore further with Swale Borough Council, Kent County Council and Highways England potential options for lorry parking within Swale district.

 

Reason for the decision: Overnight lorry parking in inappropriate areas can cause road safety problems, environmental issues as well as disruption and inconvenience to residents in the Canterbury district. If a suitable location for a lorry park can be found in the Swale Borough area then this could provide a good long term solution. This would need to be combined with appropriate enforcement measures such as zonal parking restrictions with clamping similar to the trial carried out by Ashford Borough Council.

Record of the voting

For (11): Councillors B Baker, Baldock, Bartley, A Cook, S Cook, Doyle, Glover, L Jones, Samper, A Taylor and Walker.

Against or abstaining: None

 

772.

Any other urgent business to be dealt with in public

Minutes:

There was no other urgent business to be discussed at the meeting.