6 JOINT WASTE AUTHORITIES
94. The Government proposes, in the Local Government
and Public Involvement in Health Bill, expected to become law
later in 2007, to allow for the creation of Joint Waste Authorities
where several authorities desire formal co-operative arrangements.
95. In practice, many collection and disposal authorities
already operate partnership arrangements, often including formal
memoranda of understanding, although they are not at present,
except in London, constituted as legal entities. In London, four
statutory joint waste disposal authorities have existed since
the Greater London Council was abolished. Among those who submitted
evidence to us, councils in Lincolnshire, Essex, Buckinghamshire,
Shropshire and Cambridgeshire already work together across local
authority boundaries. To take just one example of the benefits
claimed, the Waste Partnership for Buckinghamshire says: "Joint
working has existed amongst the local authorities in Buckinghamshire
for over 10 years and has been a key factor in securing external
funding that has enabled the kerbside collection service to expand
and deliver the current recycling rates and successes."[149]
The LGA notes: "Joint working has potential benefits in generating
efficiency savings through economies of scale, purchasing power,
technological expertise, asset management, IT infrastructure".[150]
The North London Waste Authority (NLWA), which includes seven
boroughs, confirms that 'joined-up' financial management "eases"
joint working arrangements.[151]
The Government identifies further potential benefits from "cost
efficiencies through joint procurement for collection contracts,
single collection contract across a number of authorities, opportunities
to share waste facilities, trucks and staff; and more joined-up
services within and across local areas."[152]
96. In spite of the general welcome for the idea,
however, two issues have emerged during our inquiry. First, some
councils have identified difficulties in achieving co-operative
arrangements. Secondly, concerns have been expressed about the
democratic accountability of larger authorities. The latter concern
was comprehensively dismissed by the LGA's Programme Director,
Martin Wheatley: "the people who run it are democratically
elected, accountable members of the local authorities who make
up the [joint waste] authority […] It will be answerable
to the authorities who have got together to form it."[153]
97. The difficulties of achieving co-operation are
slightly more complex. City of Lincoln Council and East Lindsey
Council described an attempt at joint procurement with three other
authorities which foundered because of problems involving differing
direct labour organisations and the transfer of undertakings.
Questions of how costs would be allocated also proved insuperable.[154]
Chichester District Council, while saying it had benefited from
local co-operative arrangements, also questioned whether large
county-wide contracts might not negatively affect local responsiveness
and flexibility.[155]
The LGA, while favouring the possibility of joint authorities,
also warned that the "difficulties of establishing such arrangements
should not however be underestimated."[156]
Nevertheless, we conclude that the introduction of a power
allowing councils to form joint authorities where they wish to
do so is welcome. No authority will be required to do so,
and no authority will be required to enter a partnership that
follows collection or disposal strategies markedly different from
its own preferred local options. The proposal to allow joint authorities
adds to the tools available to local collection and disposal authorities
without reducing their autonomy to act as they see fit.
98. WRAP, however, highlighted the need for local
authorities to "give up some of their autonomy" if the
expected cost savings are to materialise. "For example, if
a consortium of authorities procures identical bins, there are
likely to be cost savings due to the economies of scale. However,
if each authority reserves the right to specify the type, size
and colour of the bins used in their areas, these savings are
unlikely to materialise in practice."[157]
99. A running theme of this report has been the cornucopia
of differing collection and disposal authorities, systems and
strategies in place in England. We referred earlier to a long-term
aspiration towards greater consistency of approach without reducing
the autonomy of local authorities better placed than central Government
to identify and implement the best means of collection in their
areas. In spite of the difficulties that some authorities may
experience, the move towards greater joint working will be
even more welcome if it brings about cost efficiencies, an increasing
degree of shared practice and, possibly, some standardisation
of approach to collection of different recycling streams and such
things as a colour-coded system for different streams.
149 RC 10, Waste Partnership for Buckinghamshire memorandum,
printed in vol. II Back
150
RC 40, Local Government Association memorandum, printed in vol.
II Back
151
RC 60, North London Waste Authority memorandum, printed in vol.
II Back
152
RC 47, DEFRA and DCLG joint memorandum, printed in vol. II Back
153
QQ 85-86 Back
154
RC 1, City of Lincoln District Council memorandum, and RC 5, East
Lindsey District Council memorandum, both printed in vol. II Back
155
RC 3, Chichester District Council memorandum, printed in vol.
II Back
156
RC 40, Local Government Association memorandum, printed in vol.
II Back
157
RC 44, Waste and Resources Action Programme memorandum, printed
in vol. II Back
|
