The Secretary reminded Members of the Joint Committee that it is a requirement for them to declare interests that are Personal or Prejudicial, where appropriate.

Councillor Maurice Groves (Merton Alternate Member) declared a prejudicial interest in matters pertaining to Garth Road as he lives in that road.

Councillor Colin Hall declared a personal interest in all the items as he is a member of the London Waste and Recycling Board.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 30 September 2009 were confirmed as a correct record.

The current position on the following three contracts was reported:

Contract 1 – land fill and Transportation (Viridor Waste Management Ltd)

·        The contract is operating effectively and there are no performance issues.

·        A decision is still awaited from Sutton Council in respect of the out of normal operating hours opening for receiving specific types of waste from the partnership.

·        Arrangements are in place to receive deliveries of municipal waste during the Christmas and New Year period.

·        Kingston Internal Audit team are investigating an on-going issue with weighbridge discrepancies, with the support of Partnership officers and Viridor representatives.

Contract 2 – Management of Household Reuse & Recycling Centres (Environmental Waste Controls)

·        EWC continues to perform well, including investigating all complaints promptly and effectively.

·        Recycling performance is far exceeding the contract targets.

·        EWC are prepared for handling all recyclable material and waste delivered to the seven sites during the Christmas and New Year period.

Contract 3 – Materials Recycling Services, Composting and Additional Treatment Services (Viridor Waste Management Ltd)

·        There are no operation issues to report on composting of green garden and kitchen food waste.

·        Despite the recent downtime at the new Lakeside energy from waste facility, the Partnership has delivered in excess of 8,000 tonnes of household waste, and is on target to achieve 10,000 tonnes by 31 March 2010.

It was AGREED to note the contents of the report outlining aspects of the performance of the Phase A contracts.

Reason for decision

To enable the Joint Committee to comment on the performance of these contracts.

The Joint Waste Committee (JWC) agreed, at its previous meeting, to the principle of inserting a formal Urgency Procedure into the Constitution, based on the Kingston model.  A proposed procedure was submitted for approval. 

The JWC had also previously identified a need to amend part of the Constitution to remove an apparent anomaly in the wording of one of the clauses relating to Voting Members.  Revised wording was also submitted to address this anomaly.

Each participating council’s executive will also be required to similarly resolve to amend the Joint Committee’s Constitution, unless the Voting Member has delegated authority to approve such matters.

Councillor George had requested a further amendment to the proposed wording, which would insert the requirement that the written agreement of each of the Partner boroughs was obtained before the Urgency Procedure was actioned.  Members endorsed this suggested change.

The Joint Committee AGREED:

1.         To agree to amend section 4.11 of the Constitution to read:-

“4.11   Each of the Participating Councils shall have one vote on any issue before the Committee for determination exercisable by its voting Member (or substitute voting Member) and all such decisions of the Committee shall be made through simple majority voting save for:-“

2.         To insert an additional section 4.20 as follows:-

“Urgency Procedure

4.20    In this section the terms:-

            “Chair of the Management Group” shall mean the chair for the time being of the management group established by the Joint Committee and

“urgent” shall have the same meaning as set out in Annex 2 to the Constitution at S9.1.2A

4.20.1 Where the Chair of the Committee considers, having first consulted with and obtained the written agreement of the voting Member (or substitute voting Member) for each Participating Council, that an urgent decision is required in respect of any matter relating to a Function delegated to the Committee listed in Schedule 1 of the Constitution and that the urgent decision required would not reasonably require the calling an extraordinary meeting of the Committee to consider it, and should not wait until the next ordinary meeting of the Committee, then, upon further consulting with the Chair of the Management Group, the Char of the Management Group may make such urgent decision which shall then have immediate effect as it if were a decision of the Committee at its meeting. 

In this clause 4.20.1 reference to the word "written" shall include, without limitation, forms of electronic writing"

4.20.2  Following the exercise on each occasion of the power described in 4.20.1 above, the Chair of the Management Group shall prepare a report to be made to the next meeting of the Committee detailing the decision taken and explaining the need for treating it as urgent.

4.20.3  For the sake of clarity:-

nothing in this section 4.20 shall act at any time as a bar or prevent the Chair of the Management Group from calling an extraordinary meeting of the Committee in accordance with rule R3.1 d) Annexe 1 to the Constitution (Meeting Procedure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

The second monitoring report for the 2009/10 budget set out the spend to 30 September 2009.  The Management Group is satisfied that the costs in the current year are being managed appropriately and will regularly scrutinise the expenditure to ensure that it remains within budget.

Details of the two posts required to support the Phase B process were also submitted for approval, as requested by Members at the previous meeting.

The Joint Committee AGREED:

1.         to note the latest 2009/10 expenditure position; and

2.         the appointment of two posts to support the Phase B process.

Reason for Decision

To advise the Joint Committee of the financial position to month 6 of the 2009/10 financial year, and ensure the Phase B procurement is adequately resources.

The Audit Commission is carrying out an audit of the 2008/09 South London Waste Partnership accounts.  As part of this work, they had asked that two documents: The Code of Audit Practice and The Statement of Responsibilities of Auditors and of Audited Bodies should be distributed to all Members of the Joint Committee for information.

The Audit Commission had also asked the Partnership a number of questions relating to governance and fraud, to help them understand the Joint Committee’s processes.  The Chair of the Management Group had responded to these by letter, a copy of which had been circulated.

Councillor Bashford asked about the report into the weighbridge discrepancies at Beddington Farmlands landfill, being undertaken by Kingston Internal Audit.  Officers confirmed that the Joint Committee would receive a copy of the final report on this matter.

It was AGREED to note the documents in Appendix A to the report and approve the letter in Appendix B in response to the Auditor’s questions.

Reason for Decision

To comply with the Audit Commission’s requirements that all Members are informed about the audit process.

The following reports may be considered in private if the Joint Committee agrees that, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public are excluded from the meeting on the grounds that it is likely that exempt information, as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, will be disclosed.

It was AGREED that, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public are excluded from the meeting on the grounds that it is likely that exempt information, as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, would be disclosed.  This paragraph covers details of the financial and business details of individuals, businesses and the Partnership.

Members of the public then left the room.

A revised version of the Communications Strategy was presented for adoption.  The Strategy had been updated to include input from Members, following the discussion on this item at the previous meeting.  It was also complemented by a Communications Plan.  The Plan plotted the key milestones for the Partnership, established when residents should be informed or engaged and scheduled in specific communications activities, together with a budget forecast for delivering these activities.

Councillor Thomas suggested that a protocol was required to enable the four Partner boroughs to approve material before it was published on the SLWP’s website.  Members endorsed this proposal and agreed that its wording should be agreed between the Partners via email.

Progress was also reported on preparing the Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy.  The Management Group had agreed to appoint Ipsos MORI to carry out additional quantitative and qualitative survey work.  A final version of the JMWMS will now be submitted to the Joint Committee on 28 July 2010.

The Joint Committee AGREED to formally adopt the revised SLWP Communications Strategy, subject to it being amended to include a protocol for approving material to be published on SLWP’s website, similar to that agreed for press releases, and note the supporting Communications Plan.

Reason for Decision

To put in place a robust Communications Strategy that will support the work of the SLWP.

The Joint Committee received an update on the key aspects of the Phase B procurement process.  Four organisations had submitted Outline Proposals and evaluation and moderation was being undertaken with a view to providing the Invitation to Submit Outline Solutions (ISOS) Evaluation report to the January 2010 meeting.

It was AGREED to note progress on the procurement.

Reason for Decision

To inform the Joint Committee of the current position on key aspects of the Phase B procurement.

The report outlined the changes that had been made to the risk register since the Joint Committee’s meeting in September.  Two red risks had been downgraded to amber, to reflect the progress made against the risks. 

The Joint Committee AGREED:

1.         to note the three red risks and the mitigation that the officers are putting in place against these risks; and

2.         to note the reduction of risks 5.7 and 8.1 from red to amber, as described in the exempt report.

Reason for Decision

To be advised on the current position on the risk register.