David Kleinberg presented the report that outlined the proposal for the Council to re-tender for the brought-in support services that assist the Council in meeting the objectives to improve the environment and neighbourhoods for Thurrock residents. Phil Carver provided an overview on the performance and required standards of the contract to date and detailed future projections based on known comparatives and requested permission to progress the report’s recommendations to Cabinet.

Councillor J Kent asked for some elaboration on the enforcements of environmental crime. Phil Carver stated that littering was a statutory offence   and that there were processes in place for the Grays Town Centre PSPO which was written by Thurrock Council that the current contractor must abide by.

Councillor Rigby questioned how many contractors there were currently, how often they patrolled and what areas were covered. Officers informed Councillor Rigby there was currently one contractor and officers would be assigned to hot spot areas which may have been based on the number of complaints received from residents. Members were informed that contractors wore body-worn cameras and activated at the start of each interaction with alleged offenders.

Councillor Redsell questioned how many mobile cameras the environmental enforcement team had to which it was confirmed they had four.

Councillor J Kent stated his disappointment in the case being made for the in-house option as it currently did not highlight some of the real positives this could bring to the borough. There was also a lost training opportunity that could be attached to the issuing of fines. For example, for offenders being fined for dropping cigarette butts should be followed up with information or help on how to stop smoking. Councillor J Kent suggested that some flexibility, common sense and some education was required to be in place alongside enforcements.

Councillor J Kent stated that recommendation 2 as it currently stood was invalid and needed to be changed to reflect where the authority of delegation would fall. Members agreed to change recommendation 2 to say the authority of delegation would fall to the Director of Environment, Highways and Counter Fraud.

Councillor Redsell questioned if the service were to be tendered out who would be in charge of tickets and what would come back in house. Officers confirmed that in respect of tickets this would be based on percentage and currently the contractor received £42.50 for each fixed penalty notice.

Councillor Redsell questioned if the service were to go to another contractor how many more officers would there be in Thurrock. Officers stated this would be currently the same as now, one supervisor, four officers and one admin officer.

Councillor Redsell referred to the current contractor already in place and questioned what actual differences would it make in going out for another tender. Officers stated the current contract which had been working very well was due to expire in December 2021 and stated that the Council would be looking at widening the contractors remit to deal with more offences which are absolute offences that are non-investigative.

Councillor J Kent raised the question that whoever was successful in winning the tender the Council would receive an increased percentage of fines. Officers stated that it would be two thirds of the payment to the contractor and one third to the Council. Councillor J Kent stated this was a hefty increase and reminded Members that if the services were kept in-house the Council would keep 100% of the fine payment.

Councillor Rigby questioned whether the contractor received any commission in the means of an additional fee or payment or were their payment purely based on the percentage of fines. Officers stated there was no commission with current contractors and would not likely to see that in any future contracts.

Councillor Redsell questioned what the risks would be to deliver an in-house enforcement service. Officers stated there would be costs to the Council such as financial and legal risks, training, equipment, sickness, conduct, capabilities, appraisals, redundancy costs. Members were also referred to the in-house comparisons within the report.

Councillor Redsell questioned whether the existing contractors could take part in the procurement exercise. Officers stated that they could.

Councillors Lawrence suggested that consideration could be given to shorten the contract to two years instead of four years. Officers stated that from experience contracts would be set at a four year minimum.

Councillor Van Day questioned whether the current contractors were employed to undertake any other services for the Council. It was stated they had delegated authority for fly-posting and graffiti.

Councillor Rigby questioned what the current contractual hours were. Officers stated the contract was from 7.00am to 5.00pm, Saturday working but there was a flexible agreement in place for these hours to be changed.

It was noted for the minutes that Councillor J Kent voted against recommendation 2.

RESOLVED

That the Cleaner, Greener and Safer Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

1.         Noted the content contained within the report; and

2.         Recommend to Cabinet to delegate the authority for the tender and subsequent award of a new contract to the Director of Environment, Highways and Counter Fraud on a payment by results basis, based on Option 3 (3.3 of the report).