Apologies were received from co-opted members Colin Powell and Geoffrey Newman.  

There were no declarations of pecuniary interest.

The call-in was presented by the signatories.

Key points made by Councillor Holden:

·         Concerned about the introduction of wheeled bins, fortnightly residual waste collections and the rush with which these are being introduced - will damage the local community notably Wimbledon;

·         The administration has no mandate for the change as was not included in its 2014 manifesto;

·         Task groups rejected wheeled bins in 2005 and 2011;

·         The stated 10% saving to be achieved fails to account for the capital funding required for the rollout of wheeled bins and new bin lorries;

·         There has been no consultation with residents and not enough done to consider the needs of disabled and elderly residents as well as staff and requirements around TUPE; and

·         Cabinet needs to reconsider its decision based on providing residents with greater choice and consultation.  The weekly residual waste collection should be retained and other savings considered.

Additional points made by Councillor Grocott:

·         No evidence provided that the proposed waste collection solution will achieve the claimed changes in resident behaviour, increase the use of food caddies and/or lead to more recycling;

·         Residents are not provided with any choice in the number and size of containers that will be needed for the proposed waste collection service.  Advice is not provided on how these can be stored; and

·         Residents will get half the service for a 10% saving.

Councillors Holden and Grocott answered questions from members:

·         An additional £4m capital funding for vehicles and wheeled bins will be required which has not yet been approved;

·         Requested to understand at what point the administration decided to change its policy and introduce wheeled bins;

·         The focus on Wimbledon reflects the level of correspondence received from this part of the borough and the fact it has a large number of flats and smaller houses making wheeled bins difficult to accommodate;

·         The focus on the shift to fortnightly residual waste collections reflects this that weekly collections are highly valued and the aspect of the current service most mentioned by residents; and

·         The Lavender Fields pilot is considered inadequate because the waste collection service trialled was different from that now being proposed.  It featured weekly residual waste collections, comingling of recycling and was based on a small and unrepresentative sample of Merton households. 

The following additional comments were made:

·         Councillor Southgate, as Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Commission, agreed to look at the process of providing documents requested in the call-in form through the meeting agenda;

·         Councillor Uddin noted new vehicles would have to be purchased in any event and are not necessitated by the LOT 1 contract.  Also, that fewer replacement vehicles are needed because of the contract.

The Commission then heard from a series of requested witnesses and speakers.

Key points from Terry Downes, GMB representative:

·         TUPE is not being applied during the competitive tendering process.  This is open to legal challenge by the GMB;

·         Nonsensical to outsource services if cost savings can be achieved by the in-house team;

·         Outsourcing will lead to longer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Please note: appendices 2 to 6 are the same for both LOT 1 and LOT 2 call-ins.  They are therefore only provided once under item 3.

The call-in was introduced by the signatories.

Key points made by Councillor Najeeb Latif:

·         Does not believe contracting out is in the best interests of the staff, Merton’s parks, Friends Groups or residents;

·         There has been no consultation on the proposal;

·         The experience of staff has failed to be considered as part of the new approach;

·         Staff and Friends Groups will withdraw their good will as result of this new approach;

·         Not possible to provide a better service than currently without diminishing the terms and conditions of staff; and

·         Need for reassurances – that TUPE has and will continue to be applied, staff will be safeguarded and will be retained in posts in the longer term.

Councillor Dean asked the following questions:

·         Why has there been no consultation with staff, Friends Groups and residents?

·         Why was the Greenspaces staff team not allowed to bid?

·         Why will the administration not guarantee the rights of staff?

The Commission then heard from a series of requested witnesses and speakers.

Key points from Terry Downes, GMB representative:

·         The council has failed to observe and enforce TUPE.  This could make any decision taken by the council irrelevant if legally challenged;

·         Highlighted that the objectives of the contract could have been fulfilled in-house but that the in-house bid was ruled out of the bidding process on a technicality;

·         The uncertainty means staff are already leaving (noted this applies to grave diggers and horticultural staff) with more departures anticipated;

·         The desired economies of scale have not been defined – targets and cost savings are unknown; and

·         The specification for the proposed service still hasn’t been provided.

In response to member questions, Terry Downes added:

·         Legal action could be taken on the basis that TUPE has not been adhered to during the competitive dialogue process.  Under TUPE workers’ terms and conditions should remain the same from the outset of this process until workers are transferred to the employment of the new provider under contract.  The contractor then has a legal obligation to consult with workers on any proposed change to terms and conditions.  The council’s liability for not adhering to TUPE could be £1.1m.

Tina Picard, a Unison representative, asked for her key remarks to be made through the Chair.  Tina highlighted that the TUPE process should be transparent and that there is concern about the stress this process is putting on staff.

Key points from Ruth Baber, trustee Sustainable Merton:

·         Sustainable Merton and Friends Groups are unsure about the council’s desire to develop a commercial environment for the management and oversight of green spaces – no information has been provided about how this will work;

·         Merton has a lot of green spaces so a change in approach will have a big impact;

·         There are lots of examples of how Friends Groups have worked in partnership with the council’s Greenspaces team to benefit Merton’s green spaces;

·         Not sure that the value of the partnership with Friends Groups has been considered nor the feasibility of this continuing with a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.