Return to Agenda

 

OXFORDSHIRE WASTE PARTNERSHIP JOINT COMMITTEE

 

Minutes of a meeting of the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership Joint Committee held at Bodicote House, Bodicote, Banbury on Friday 30 November 2007 at 9.30am.

 

Present:          Councillor Kieron Mallon (in the Chair) (CDC)
                       

Councillors Roger Belson (OCC), Tony De Vere (VOWHDC), David Dodds (SODC), David Harvey (WODC) and Jean Fooks (O City).

 

Officers:          Wayne Lewis (OWP Co-ordinator), Colin Bailey (O City), Steve Bishop (VOWHDC), Ian Davies (CDC), Richard Dudding (OCC), Cath James (WODC), Andrew Pau (OCC), Ed Potter (CDC), Matt Prosser (SODC), Sally Wilson (SODC), Steve Lodge (CDC).

 

PART I: MATTERS NOT OF AN EXEMPT OR CONFIDENTIAL NATURE

 

234             

MINUTES

ACTION BY

 

 

The Minutes of the meeting held on 28 September 2007 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

 

 

235             

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

 

 

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

 

 

 

236             

SHARON COSGROVE

 

 

 

The Committee noted that Sharon Cosgrove no longer represented Oxfordshire City Council on the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership.  It was agreed that a letter be written to Sharon Cosgrove thanking her for her significant contribution to the Partnership.

 

 

 

 

 

237             

MATTERS ARISING

 

 

 

In response to a question relating to Minute 230 the OWP Support and delivery structure I Davies stated that the operational and project groups agreed at the last were currently being constituted and would be in operation shortly.

 

 

 

RESOLVED that Members of the Committee be informed of the officers who would be appointed to serve on the operational and project groups.

 

Wayne Lewis

238             

NEW FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

 

 

 

The Committee considered a further report on new financial arrangements and Wayne Lewis reminded Members of the background relating to this matter.  He stated that a simplified approach had now been developed and this addressed the concerns relating to food waste incentive payments and model sensitivity and still met the OWP’s agreed financial principles.

 

 

 

Under the new model the Statutory Instrument (recycling credits system) was maintained as the basis of payments by the Waste Disposal Authority to the Waste Collection Authorities.  It offered a payment for each tonne of waste that was recycled or composted and reflected the saved cost of not having to dispose of waste that was instead recycled or composted by the collection authorities.  This payment had provisionally been set at £40.00 in 2009/10 (the predicted cost of land filling a tonne of waste, before landfill tax) and increased each year with inflation.  This tonnage based recycling credit replaced the previous “per household recycling credit” payment set within the partnerships financial principles.

 

 

 

The statutory recycling credit provided a clear reward for increased recycling and composting where as the credit per household did not.  However taken in isolation it placed emphasis on recycling rather than reduction of overall waste.  The new model therefore retained residual waste incentive/penalty payment.  The residual waste payment had provisionally been set at 50% of the recycling credit rate (approximately £20 in 2009/10).  This payment was designed to ensure that the recycling and composting targets set out in the Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy were met.  It was still calculated in the same way as set out within the OWP’s agreed financial principles, so each collection authority received the same residual waste allowance per household.  This maintained the equity principle set out within the OWP Partnership Agreement.

 

 

 

The Biodegradable Municipal Waste Target set within the OWP partnership agreement had been dropped.  Collection authorities were unable to meet these targets resulting in affordability issues.  Whilst dropping this target had weakened the relationship between the collection authorities’ performance and the Landfill Allowance Trading scheme targets, it was felt that the residual waste target essentially achieved the same thing, encouraging collection authorities to reduce residual waste and by dong this had helped greatly to simplify the model.

 

 

 

The Committee noted that the appendix 1 highlighted a problem that the current forecasts foresaw that a number of authorities recycling rates plateaued at 40% to 45%.  This resulted in the OWP recycling rate failing to get beyond 47%, 8% short of the 2020 target for 55%.  The Officer Strategy Group would review these forecasts to ensure that they remained accurate and would also consider additional measures to improve performance.

 

Wayne Lewis

 

The full spreadsheet model supporting these arrangements had been presented to the Oxfordshire Treasurers Association who had agreed to assist with the model verification and initial checks had already been completed.  The Association had agreed to develop options on transitional arrangements.

 

 

 

 

An update had been provided to the October meeting of the Oxfordshire Leaders Group who had noted the progress in relation to the new simpler arrangements and reaffirmed their commitment to developing a model that was acceptable to all partner authorities and would be ready for implementation in April 2009.  The Leaders had agreed that this revised model should be on the basis of further work and the OWP sought to agree the new financial arrangements by Spring 2008.  A report would then be presented to the Oxfordshire Leaders Group for agreement on the financial arrangements by April 2008.

 

 

Wayne Lewis/

Ian Davies

 

R Dudding drew the attention of the Partnership to the fact that the County Council would suffer adverse financial payments during the first six years of the arrangements.

 

 

 

I Davies stated that it was proposed to run the new model in parallel with the current system in 2008/09 in order to correct any errors in the new system and to ensure a smooth transition when the new arrangements were introduced.

 

 

 

RESOLVED

 

(1)          that the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership agrees the revised approach set out above and that the following tasks be completed with a view to reaching a financial agreement on the new financial arrangements at the next meeting of the Partnership in February 2008:

 

·         finalising the unit payment levels for both recycling credit and residual waste target payments, so that residual waste reduction is prioritised over increased recycling and composting;

·         full checks by each of the Partner Authorities on the financial cost to them;

·         re-visiting the tonnage forecast provided by each collection authority to ensure consistency and to assess scope for further progress towards JMWMS targets;

·         Model verification by the Oxfordshire Treasurers Association;

·         Agreeing any short term transitional arrangements (to be developed by the Treasurers Association), if needed, to phase in the financial impacts resulting from the new arrangements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All Officers

 

Oxfordshire Treasurers Association

239             

DRAFT BUDGET

 

 

 

The Partnership considered a report on the draft budget 2008/09 and were reminded that they had previously considered this on 28 September when further information was requested on the proposed two additional staffing posts and also on the proposed communications campaign.  The updated copy of the draft budget was considered by the Partnership.

 

 

 

Since the last meeting an officer project team had begun planning the communications campaign that would follow on from the current WRAP funded “Recycle for Oxfordshire” campaign.

 

 

 

The Partnership noted that the next campaign would be a targeted approach using printed literature (leaflets and stickers) There would be a focus on face to face contact through canvassing and road shows. It would also make the most of existing resources such as the Community Action Groups, voluntary sector service providers and council newsletters. It would support major service developments such as food waste collections. The campaign would see a greater level of audience segmentation, encourage lower performing areas to get the recycling “basics” right whereas a more sophisticated waste reduction message would be developed for areas where levels of recycling were already high.

 

 

 

 

The Communications Officer role within the budget would be responsible for delivering the campaign. This would include working with suppliers, liaison with Partner Authorities, monitoring and reporting on progress and the managing of the campaign budget. The communications officer would also provide some much needed support to the wider, recently agreed OWP communications plan and also to the communications related aspects of the Local Area Agreement targets.

 

 

 

A further post was considered particularly in relation to enforcements.  This would be closely linked to the work of the proposed Environmental Protection and Cleaning Group, which would shape the precise job content particularly the delivery of LAA1 and LAA2 targets.

 

 

 

The Partnership noted that since the last meeting it has been announced that there would be some WPEG funding available in 2008/09. However, it remained unclear as to whether there will be funding in subsequent years.

 

 

 

A key change was that next year this funding will be paid as part of individual authorities Formula Grant. It was different to the current situation where the funding was paid as a single amount, passed in its entirety to OWP and then redistributed to partners after contributions had been taken.

 

 

 

The grant had also been substantially reduced next year. Information available to date indicated that nationally the WPEG in 2008/09 would be £43m, compared to a £110m in 2007/08. If it were assumed the grant for Oxfordshire would be in proportion to the national reduction the County could expect around £0.531m, a reduction of £0.827m in 2008/09 and the Partnership noted details of the funding for 2008/09 if this were the case.

 

 

 

The potential ‘passported’ WPEG funding available in 2008/09, would be sufficient to cover the draft OWP budget, but did not leave much surplus for redistribution to Partner Councils. Thus the partner contributions within the draft budget for 2008/09 could be reduced to zero and replaced by WPEG funding. This change had been made within the revised draft OWP budget for approval by the committee.

 

 

 

 

Individual Councillors and Officers in response to the report:-

 

(1)         considered that the Partnership should put pressure on supermarkets to reduce packaging;

 

(2)         enquired how the Government would decide the WPEG allocation for 2008/09;

 

(3)         consider that the Partnership should look to reduce the use of plastic bags in the County;

 

(4)         that hard hitting poster campaign should be undertaken;

 

(5)         expressed concerns that the WPEG funding was not ring fenced.  In this connection it was proposed that the grants of local authorities would be passported to Oxfordshire Waste Partnership;

 

(6)         expressed some concern that the funding of the two new posts might put financial pressure on individual local authorities and were not convinced these would provide value for money.

 

In response I Davies stated the programme of works as set by Oxfordshire Waste Partnership to meet government waste targets placed a heavy workload on officers.  He outlined the work that would be undertaken by officers employed to the two new posts and stated that investment employing these officers could result in significant financial rewards by achieving LAA targets;

 

(7)         The Partnership noted that it was proposed that the two posts had been included in the budget for the next three years;

 

(8)         Felt that the six local authorities should be advised of the benefits of the budget and the new post which would deliver potential future LAA targets.

 

 

 

RESOLVED

 

(1)          that the draft budget for 2008/09 as circulated be approved;

 

(2)          that Partner Authorities agree to passport the 2008/09 WPEG funding to the OWP, so that the existing funding arrangements are maintained and to ensure that OWP priorities continue to be met;

 

(3)          that further information is sought from DEFRA on the formal WPEG allocations for 2008/09 and on allocations for future years;

 

(4)          that the six partner authorities be advised of the benefits of the budget and the new posts which would deliver specifically the potential for future LAA rewards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Andrew Pau

 

 

Oxfordshire Treasurers

Wayne Lewis

240             

NEW INITIATIVES FUND APPLICATIONS

 

 

 

The Partnership were reminded of the New Initiative Fund Scheme which had opened to bids in May 2007.

 

 

 

The Partnership noted that the New Initiative Fund currently contained half of the Performance Reward Grant for the Public Service Agreement.  This amounted to £537,771.5. Half of this (£268,885) was capital and half revenue. The remaining 50% would be paid into the New Initiative Fund in 2008/09. Reward grant payable for the achievement of the current Local Area Agreement targets should be available to the New Initiative Fund in 2009/10.

 

 

 

On 9th November the Officer Strategy Group had assessed five New Initiative Fund bids submitted by Vale of White Horse and had recommended that one bid for Hessian sacks in the sum of £7,680 should be made whilst the other four bids should not be granted.  The Committee duly noted the reasons for these recommendations.

 

 

 

 

Colin Bailey expressed his concern that the Officer Strategy Group set up to consider these applications met only quarterly and sometimes applicants needed to be process more expeditiously in view of the time limits.

 

 

 

RESOLVED

 

(1)          that the bid of the Vale of White Horse to the New Initiative Fund for the purchase of Hessian sacks be supported, subject to further information on anticipated recycling performance being provided;

 

(2)          that the other four bids be not supported and

 

(3)          that delegated authority be given to the OWP Chairman to agree grants in respect of New Initiative Fund applications and this be subject to the call in procedure of local authorities in Oxfordshire

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Lewis

241             

DRAFT SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY CONSULTATION

 

 

 

The Committee considered the Sustainable Communities Consultation document which had been prepared by the Oxfordshire Partnership.  The Committee noted that the Oxfordshire partnership were the strategic partnership for Oxfordshire and bought together organisations from the public, private, voluntary and community sectors.

 

 

 

A draft Sustainable Community Strategy which set out a long-term vision to improve the quality of life within Oxfordshire and had been issued for consultation to key thematic partnerships. including the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership.

 

 

 

The revised draft strategy would go to the Oxfordshire Partnership for discussion/agreement at the next meeting on 11 December and would then be issued for public consultation in January and February 2008.

 

 

 

The consultation listed the new national preferred indicators set and the OWP was listed as the lead organisation for five measures.  There were:-

 

  • NI 191 Residual household waste per head
  • NI 192 Household waste recycled and composted
  • NI 193 Municipal waste land filled
  • NI 195 Improved street and environmental cleanliness (levels of graffiti, litter, detritus and fly posting)
  • NI 196 Improved street and environmental cleanliness – fly tipping

 

 

 

The Consultees were also asked to suggest indicators that might be used to support the delivery of the Sustainable Community Strategy within the new Local Area Agreement (LAA2).

 

 

 

The Committee noted that the deadline for suggested performance indicators was that day and Members were therefore requested to make suggestions to Wayne Lewis as quickly as possible.

 

 

 

Councillor Fooks suggested that the partnership might look to reduce packaging in relation to retail waste.

 

 

 

Although the members conceded that targeting the reduction of business waste should be dealt with nationally it was felt that the OWP should concentrate on the reduction of retail waste.  It was considered generally that the OWP was achieving the targets set in the national performance indicators.

 

 

 

RESOLVED that the OWP Co-ordinator feeds back any suggestions, amendments and/or questions raised by the Partnership

 

Wayne Lewis

All Members

242             

LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT

 

 

 

The Committee were reminded that as part of the current Local Area Agreement between the Public Service Board and the Government Office of the South East England, the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership had taken on the governance of three environmental targets, details of which were noted by the Committee.

 

 

 

The current LAA ran from 2006/07 to 2008/09 inclusive and the Public Service Board was now considering the next LAA which started on 1 April 2008 and would run initially in parallel to the current agreement for 2008/09 to 2010/11 inclusive.  The Board was now inviting suggested targets from the different partnerships across Oxfordshire for LAA 2.

 

 

 

It had been proposed that the OWP submitted suggested targets that built on the current ones and were also in line with the OWP strategy and its associated targets.

 

 

 

The Committee noted the following suggested targets which were in line with the new national performance indicators.

 

 

 

Target 1 – To decrease the amount of residual waste per household.

 

Target 2 – To increase household waste recycled and composted

 

Target 3 – To reduce the carbon footprint of Oxfordshire Business’ through waste reduction

 

Target 4 – To reduce the levels of litter, detritus, graffiti and fly posting in the County

 

Target 5 – To reduce the number of incidents of fly-tipping within Oxfordshire.

 

 

 

RESOLVED that

 

(1)          the OWP approves the outline targets for submission to the Public Service Board.

 

(2)          The OWP delegates authority to Chairman of the Officer Strategy Group, in consultation with the Chairman of the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership to draft the details of the targets and negotiate with the Public Service Board on behalf of the partnership and

 

(3)          An updated report is presented to OWP when further details become available.

 

 

 

 

 

Chairmen of Officer Strategy Group and Oxfordshire Waste Partnership

Carolyn Durrant

243             

JOINT MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY ACTION PLANS

 

 

 

The Committee considered a report on the progress on the implementation of the 2007/08 Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy (JMWMS) action plans.

 

 

 

The Committee were reminded that they had received JMWMS action plans for 2007/08 at the meeting on 30 March 2007 and these included a joint action plan together with individual plans for each of the partner authorities and the report provided an update on the performance of these plans to date.

 

 

 

The Committee noted the action plans which were attached to an appendix and each action had been assigned a “traffic light” score to indicate whether the project was:-

 

  • Completed or on track (green)
  • Progressing, but with some outstanding issues or concerns (amber)
  • Not progressing as planned (red)

 

The Committee noted comments had been added to provide an update on the progress of each action. The actions were generally proceeding well and there are few serious areas of concern.

 

 

 

Councillor Fooks referred to the amber light obtained for Oxfordshire’s aim to increase recycling and composting rates and felt that good furniture was often dumped in landfill sites and felt this could be recycled through charities.  This should be the subject of a future report to Oxfordshire Waste Partnership.

 

 

 

RESOLVED that the progress report be noted with satisfaction and that an outturn report be provided to the May 2008 meeting of the Committee.

 

 

244             

DEFINITION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE (CHARITIES AND SCHOOLS WASTE)

 

The Committee considered a report on the definition of household waste and noted that in recent months Defra had received a high volume of enquiries seeking further clarification on household and commercial waste.  In addition a variety of sources including the Audit Commission  and the Greater London Authority had brought to Defra’s attention a number of waste classification and data reporting issues.  An ongoing Audit Commission investigation of practice had revealed that even within a single county area there was a wide variation in interpretation and understanding of the legislation. 

 

 

 

The National Association of Charity Shops had accused a number of local authorities of illegally charging for waste disposal.  In response to this, Defra had written to all waste authorities in October 2007 reminding them of the existing legislation.  Defra stated that its letter did not provide new guidance or replace existing guidance and also that local authorities might wish to seek their own legal advice.

 

 

 

The Association of Waste Disposal Officers and the Local Government Association had made representations and were concerned that Defra was unaware of the significance of what was outlined in their letter.

 

 

 

Under the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1990, waste from homes, schools, universities, nursing homes and hospitals were classified as household waste.  Under section 45 of that Act the Waste Collection Authority had a duty to collect household waste in its area.

 

 

 

Paragraph (15) of the Controlled Waste Regulations (CWR) 1992 classified 'waste from premises occupied by a charity and wholly or mainly used for charitable purposes as household waste'.  Schedule 2, Regulation 4 of these Regulations listed those types of household waste for which an authority could currently make a charge for collection but not for disposal.

 

 

 

In relation to educational establishment and hospitals, household waste included “waste from residential hostels, a residential home or from premises forming part of a university, school or other educational establishment or forming part of a hospital or nursing home”.  Some authorities have interpreted this to mean that only waste from the residential parts of educational establishments and hospitals should count as household waste and the rest of the waste from these sources should be treated as commercial waste.

 

 

 

Defra was of the view is that all waste arising from premises forming part of a school, university, other educational establishment, hospital or nursing home, that was owned and operated by that organisation was household waste (except any clinical, construction or demolition waste arising from the premises) and therefore only a charge for collection could be made.

Where an educational establishment or hospital allowed a business or businesses to operate from its buildings eg a book shop in a university or snack bar in a hospital, waste arising from these sources would be commercial waste.

 

 

 

Members noted the concerns of the National Association of Waste Disposal Officers and the Local Government Association that in relation to the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme waste from schools, universities, charities, hospitals etc would not have been counted in the tonnage figures provided for 1995 (upon which the European allocation of allowances to individual countries were made) or for 2001 (upon which the national allocations to each Waste Disposal Authority were made). Therefore, meeting targets would be much more difficult and this would have very significant financial consequences as more permits would have to be bought on the open market.

 

 

 

There was also a significant increase in the cost of waste disposal for the county from the cost of disposal of waste collected from schools, charities, hospitals, universities, army barracks etc.  There was also a significant risk that charities, schools and others might try to recover their costs of past waste disposal.

 

 

 

RESOLVED that:-

 

(1)          that the Officer Strategy Group develops a position statement outlining the OWP plans to seek further clarification from Defra and in the meantime each local authority’s current arrangements will remain in place;

 

(2)          that the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership write to Defra, asking for clarification and supporting the arguments and concerns that have already been put forward by NAWDO and the LGA;

 

(3)          that a review is carried out by the Operations Group on the policies & practices in place for each of the authorities in Oxfordshire in relation to how they currently dealt with the collection of waste from educational establishments and hospitals, schools, charity shops and other premises mentioned within the Defra correspondence, and the charging mechanisms linked to these collection and disposal services;

 

(4)          On completion of (3) the Operations Group assessed the potential cost implications of addressing any differences that exist between Defra’s interpretation of the Act and regulations and that of the OWP partner councils;

 

(5)          that a further update report be prepared for the committee in due course;

 

(6)          that Defra be lobbied in relation to their interpretation of the definition of household waste through the Treasurers Association and the Local Government Association.

 

 

 

Officer Strategy Group

 

 

Wayne Lewis

 

 

 

Operations Group

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operations Group

 

 

 

Wayne Lewis

Sally Wilson

 

Wayne Lewis

245             

BUSINESS RESOURCE EFFICIENCY AND WASTE BID

 

 

 

The Committee noted a report on the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership bid for Business Resource Efficiency and Waste (BREW) programme funding.

 

 

 

·                The Committee was informed that the BREW Centre for Local Authorities was a pilot project funded through DEFRA's wider BREW Programme and was a consortium involving Oxfordshire County Council, the National Industrial Symbiosis Programme (NISP) and the Local Government Association.

 

 

 

The aim of the BREW Centre was to support Local Authorities working with their local business community to improve business resource efficiency and improve their profitability and the Partnership noted various ways which the BREW Centers had delivered in the past.

 

 

 

A number of OWP partner authorities had received funding in past years to support business waste projects.

 

The BREW team were now inviting further bids for the next round of funding, subject to securing Defra funding, on the following basis:-

 

·                Single authority bids up to £30,000 per year

 

·                Partnership authority bids would receive £30,000 per authority e g five authorities working in partnership would receive £150,000 per year for their project

 

·                Projects that span one, two and three year periods to enable Local Authorities to develop projects that would have a long term, sustainable impact on the local business community.

 

 

 

Each of the OWP partner authorities had some involvement with commercial waste ranging from providing advice to local companies on recycling and waste reduction, to the collection and disposal of their waste. Whilst some of the partners had received funding through the BREW centre previously, OWP had not submitted a joint project proposal.

 

 

 

It was therefore proposed that a bid combining commercial waste reduction and recycling advice and the expansion of commercial recycling  within the County was put forward on behalf of the OWP. This bid would benefit all authorities by helping businesses to become less wasteful and more resource efficient and support those who required assistance in providing support to local firms. It would also support those authorities that currently collected commercial waste and needed to divert this from landfill for both environmental and financial reasons. This bid would build upon the information that the County Council currently held on commercial waste in Oxfordshire following its extensive commercial waste reduction programme.

 

 

 

RESOLVED

 

(1)          that Oxfordshire Waste Partnership approves the principle of submitting a partnership bid;

 

(2)          that Oxfordshire Waste Partnership delegates authority for the Officer Strategy Group to finalise the detail of the bid and

 

(3)          the finalised bid be approved by the Oxfordshire Waste Partnership Chairman ahead of submission.

 

 

 

 

 

Officer Strategy Group

Chairman of OWP.

246             

WASTE COLLECTION JOINT PROCUREMENT PROJECT

 

 

 

The Committee considered a report on the Joint Procurement Project and noted that the Executives of South Oxfordshire, West Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse District Councils had agreed to proceed with joint procurements and the Memorandum of Understanding was being finalised for signature.

 

 

 

Discussions were ongoing with South East Centre of Excellence to agree their detailed support and this was likely to cover legal support through the preparation of contractual documents, day to day administration and project support.  Meetings had been arranged on 27 November and 4 December 2007 to finalise these arrangements.

 

 

 

The Committee noted dates for key actions relating to the procurement as follows:-

 

  • Authorities sign Memorandum of Understanding - 30 November 2007;
  • Issue initial European Journal Notice for expressions of interest - late Nov / early Dec;
  • Agree detailed project plan for procurement phase - 21 December 2007;
  • Sign Memorandum of Understanding with South East Centre of Excellence - 21 December 2007;
  • Agree output specification - 31 January 2008;
  • Complete pre qualification stage - by mid February 2008;
  • Issue Invitation to Tender - mid February 2008.

 

 

 

The report stated that a key issue which OWP needed to consider was the future shape of client management of the new contract. To optimise savings and to work effectively with the new contract / contractor it would almost certainly be necessary to rationalise client teams into one.:

 

 

 

Consideration would also need to be given to the benefits of co-location of the client team with the contractor.

 

 

 

RESOLVED

 

(1)         that the project is led and managed by South Oxfordshire, West Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse District Councils in consultation with Cherwell District Council and Oxford City Council;

 

(2)         that the OWP Coordinator be a member of the project team and

 

(3)         that the team, plan and terms of reference be in place by 31 January 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Waste Collection Joint Procurement Project Team

247             

EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC AND PRESS

 

 

 

RESOLVED that, having determined that in all the circumstances of each case the public interest in maintaining exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information, pursuant to Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be excluded from the meeting whilst the item in Part II of the agenda is considered on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as identified by the numbered paragraphs in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.

 

 

 

Return to TOP