Select Committee on Environmental Audit Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 260-262)

MR ANDY DORAN AND MR DURK REYNER
WEDNESDAY 29 JANUARY 2003

  260. It ties them into contracts which are too long, for example.
  (Mr Reyner) That would not be my interpretation of best value. I suppose that is where I may differ. To me best value is that you have to achieve statutory targets at the best price possible. That may not be cheap and it may cost you money.

  261. What would your best value indicators be then? What are the criteria against which you measure best value?
  (Mr Reyner) We are going to have to keep the recycling one, are we not, because we are being measured on it? My concern is if there is a contradiction in terms. I probably should get rid of my method of refuse collection, which is back door, no receptacle and we have one of the lowest kilograms per head disposal to landfill per year in the country, we are round about 550. What I should do is go to wheeled bins and then go fortnightly, alternate weeks. The silly thing is that I would probably then hit my recycling rates, but I would landfill more at the same time and it would go against home composting and waste minimisation because you would be putting in a system which would possibly put more waste to landfill. I do not mind the recycling indicator. It has been standardised over many years and is probably a very good comparator. I do not know whether we should raise the profile of the amount we landfill. It is in there. I believe we do calculate the kilogram per head but how much we landfill is not given the same status as a waste manager. Bit by bit we probably need to hone down how much it costs to recycle or how much it costs to landfill and that is the only way I can see indicated. We do try to work off those as comparators: "I see you only spend this. How do you do it?". That is best value and benchmarking. I did not think best value was working against waste. That is my feeling.

Sue Doughty

  262. You have been calling in your memorandum for public procurement at local level to be tackled comprehensively and about the role that public procurement could play in developing the market for recyclates. Do you have any examples of how this could happen?
  (Mr Doran) LARAC's representation comes from waste managers and I would say that we come at it from that perspective. I am not saying we are necessarily procurement specialists. One of the things which has been addressed reasonably well recently is the issue of development markets. We have traditionally complained—and I hope we do not seem to be complaining too much today—about the issue of funding and markets. I am pleased to say that markets are now in a much healthier state. One of my own personally held beliefs is that there seems to be very little standardised practice, certainly across areas of local government which I am aware of and probably Durk is aware of others. There seems to be no standardised approach to green procurement across local government and I am sure there are instances within central and other areas. I feel we could do ourselves a great service in this country in closing the loop which we have talked about for a long time, but we are not actually practising. As local government and waste people, we are out talking to the public, trying to persuade them to buy recycled as well and that is one of the campaigns which LARAC has supported, trying to promote people to buy recycled and we should be doing it ourselves. As to how to take it forward, it does need some sort of formal prescription. There is nothing which seems to have worked too well hitherto on a voluntary basis. We mentioned regional development agencies in the memorandum and there could be a lot which regional development agencies on a regional basis, building on, supporting local economies, could add to the Government network in that area. I would not go into great detail on specifics.

  Chairman: Thank you very much indeed. We have reached the end of our time. Thank you both for your very frank evidence which was extremely useful to the Committee. Thank you very much indeed.





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2003
Prepared 23 April 2003